
(lass. 
Book. 






A DEFENCE 



^ OF THE 



TRINITARIAN SYSTEM, 

IN TWENTY-FOUR SERMONS 5 

IN WHICH 

THE LEADING CONTROVERSIAL POINTS 

BETWEEN 

TRINITARIANS AND ANTI-TRINITARIANS, 

ARE STATED AND DISCUSSED. 



«^5^^«S^v. 



BY DAVID HARROW Alt, A. M. 



UTICAi 
PRINTED BY WII LlAM WILLIAMS 






3TW 



Northern District of Newark, ss, 

BE IT REMEMBERED, J hat on the fifth day of June, in the forty-sixth year of, 
the Ii;d . pendence of the Uniud Si ates < if America, A. D 1822 Dayjd Hakrowar, 
of the said District has deposited it this office the. title of a Book, the right whereof 
lie claims as Author, in the -words following, to wit : 

"A Deier.ce of the Trinitarian System, in Twenty -four Sermons; in which the 
leading controversial points between Trinitarians and Anti-Trinitarians, are stated 
and discussed. By David Harrowar. A M." ^ 

In coiiibrmitv to the act of the Congress of the United States, entitled " An act for 
the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books, to 
the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned ; " and 
also to die act, entitled '' An act supplementary to an act, entitled ' An act for the en- 
Gouragen ent of learning, bv securing the copies of maps, charts, : nd books, to the 
authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned,' and ex- 
tending the bene fits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving, and etching historical 
and other prints." 

RICHARD R LANSING, 
Clerk of the Northern District of 'New-York. 









PREFACE 



The following discourses were preached in Trenton* 
County, N. Y. in the years 1817 and 1818. Anti- 
aanism had prevailed there, through a series of 
;most from the commencement of its settlement, to 
o when these sermons were delivered, 
le author resided in that town, and officiated as a 
minister, for the space of seven years, he deemed it 
jmbent duty, to oppose this pernicious heresy, and 
the Trinitarian system. These sermons were writ- 
^„ „..d delivered for the instruction of the congregation, 
of which the author had the ministerial charge, and with- 
out any view to their publication. It must be acknowl- 
edged, that the subject discussed, is very copious and high- 
ly interesting ; and it has occupied the thoughts and the 
'pens of the most able divines, through many ages. It is a 
thing well understood, that there is a great opposition, at 
present, made to Trinitarian principles, by men who are 
classed under various names. Itr is highly necessary, 
therefore, that divine truth should be vindicated in the 
spirit of meekness, and the fallacy of the opposite errors 
pointed out, with the evils which attend them in time and 
eternity. Many, however, appear to be greatly opposed 
to, what they call, controversy ; but the advocates of a 
false theology, are never backward in exhibiting their 
views, and unless they are met in the field of argument, 
errors must prevail, and the glorious truths of Heaven suf- 
fer by the dereliction. \ 



IV PREFACE, 

It is a mournful fact, that controversy is frequently irn 
properly conducted, and great animosities occasioned by 
it ; but this grows out of the depravity of our hearts. An 
opponent should never be misrepresented, nor be treated 
with severity and contempt. In a theological dispute* 
truth, and not mere victory, should be the grand object 
The author can truly say, that for many of the Anti-Trin- 
itarians in Trenton, he entertains a very high regard, as 
gentlemen of character and talents. It is not from any 
personal ill will to that people, that the following discour- 
ses were preached, and now published ; but if he knows 
his heart, from a regard to the truth, the glory of God, 
and the salvation of men. From some of his opponents, 
he has received such marks of friendship and attention, as 
he cannot but remember with pleasure and gratitude, and 
hopes to do so, through life. 

Such is the opposition to Trinitarian doctrines, in the 
present age, that their defence has called into action the 
elegant and powerful pens of a Wardlaw in Scotland; 
Worcester, Steward, Woods and Miller in America, who 
have all exhibited in this glorious cause, a becoming Chris- 
tian zeal, extensive learning, and much force of argument 
These gentlemen have done honor to themselves — to the 
cause of the Redeemer, and to those sections of Christen- 
dom, in which they reside — they have conferred on the 
Church, now and in all future ages, the high obligation of 
gratitude and esteem. 

If it should be asked, why are not their writings on the 
subject, sufficient, without troubling the world with the 
following sheets ? The author replies ; It is not because 
he supposes himself to have equalled the productions which 
have been mentioned. The subject, however, may be 
presented in various lights, and some benefit may be deri- 
ved from them all. The shape which is given to this work? 



PREFACE. V 

is very different from that of most other authors ; and per- 
haps, it may be read by some, into whose hands, other 
books of this kind, might never have fallen. It is with a 
considerable degree of diffidence, however, that the author 
of this publication, has ventured to make his appearance, 
as a writer in the world. He is very sensible of the magni- 
tude of the subject; and that his ability to do it justice, 
may be inadequate to the undertaking. Had no other rea- 
son, however, existed in his mind, but the desire of appear- 
ing as an author, his manuscripts would have been confined 
to his own library, through life. But a train of circum- 
stances, which need not be related, left him no choice in 
this case. In passing the ordeal of learned criticism, he 
has not the vanity to think the work invulnerable. 

Such as it is, it is now offered to the Christian public, 
with the author's sincere prayer, that it may contribute 
something to the honor of God— to the support of the 
truth — to the edification of the saints — to the conviction of 
sinners ; and to the confutation of the deleterious errors, 
againt which it is levelled. But, if it should be judged 
by the Orthodox, the candid, the pious, and the discerning 
part of men, to be weak, assuming, or not adapted to ef- 
fect the object for which it is designed; he hopes that it 
will serve to promote his humility. — To God, and to his 
Church, it is, therefore, humbly and prayerfully submitted. 

It is no small gratification to the author, that he has re- 
ceived such a liberal subscription; and he feels himself 
under the high obligation of gratitude to those gentlemen 
and ladies, who have appeared as the patrons of his work. 
As the appearance of these discourses, has depended en- 
tirely upon them, the author takes this method of expres- 
sing his cordial thanks, for their confidence, hoping that 
their expectations may be fully answered, 



PREFACE. 

Among the list of his subscribers, he feels himself un- 
der peculiar obligation to that dear people, who heard these 
sermons delivered from the desk. No other town has given 
such an extensive and generous encouragement to this 
publication. As the sermons were written and preached for 
their benefit, they are now offered to them, as a memorial 
of the author's sincere regard. It is his ardent prayer, 
that they may be useful to them, and to their dear children, 
when they shall hear his voice no more. If he knows his 
heart, it was one leading motive for his first going into 
that town, that he might have an opportunity to do some- 
thing, in his ministerial capacity, to vindicate the Divinity 
and atonement of Christ, and their kindred doctrines. 
He has reason, however, to mourn, that he has not done 
more service to the glorious cause, for which the Infinite 
Redeemer died. The author has no claim on God—no 
plea to make, but unworthiness — no other ground to hope 
but the Sovereign mercy of JEHOVAH ; through the 
atoning blood of " the Lamb of God, who taketh away 
the sin of the world.*' To His blessing, therefore, the 
following sheets are prayerfully resigned, by the author, 

DAVID HARROWAR, 

Utica, June 4. 1822. 



CONTENTS. 



Page 

Sermon 1. The authenticityof 1 John 5. 7, vindi- 
cated, i 9 
Sermon 2. The subject continued, 24 
Sermon 3. The subject continued, 34 
Sermon 4. The subject improved, 50 
Sermon 5. Objections answered, 63 
Sermon 6. The answer continued, 82 
Sermon 7. The answer continued, 103 
Sermon 8. The answer continued, 118 
Sermon 9. The answer continued, 136 
Sermon 10. The Divinity of Christ proved and 

illustrated, 148 
Sermon 11. The Personality of the Holy Ghost 

proved and illustrated, 162 
Sermon 12. The offices of the Holy Ghost stated 

and illustrated, 175 
Sermon 18. The Scriptures are the only standard 

of truth, 187 

Sermon 14. The same subject continued, 199 

Sermon 15. The same subject continued, 211 

Sermon 16. The moral tendency of Anti.-Trinita- 

rianism exhibited. 223 



Vlll CONTENTS. 

Page 

Sermon 17. The same subject continued, 230 
Sermon 18. The same subject continued, 242 
Sermon 19. The same subject continued, 254 
Sermon 20. The immortality of the soul support- 
ed in opposition to materialism, 268 
Sermon 21. The same subject continued, 282 
Sermon 22. Annihilation confuted, 295 
Sermon 23. The same subject continued, 309 
Sermon 24. The humanity of Christ consistent 
with his supreme Deity, 322 



SERMON I. 



I JOHN, V. 7. 

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father > 
the Word, and the Holy Ghost : and these three are one. 



Much has been said and written in the Christian world 
on this interesting passage. The opposers of the doctrine 
of the ever blessed Trinity, have labored to make it ap- 
pear, that it is spurious — the insertion of an uninspired 
pen. They do not, however, undertake to inform us, 
when this text was added to the Holy Scriptures, nor 
what particular person, or number of persons, committed 
the forgery. To impress the public mind with the idea, 
that the words under consideration have been interpolated, 
is certainly very important for Anti-Trinitarians ; for, if 
the divinity of this passage is admitted, the doctrine of a 
Trinity of persons in God, is at once established. It must 
be expected, therefore, that every argument which is cal- 
culated to shake its sacred authority, will be eagerly sei- 
zed by them and improved to their own advantage. 

In every age, they have displayed more zeal and assi- 
duity, to overthrow the belief of a plurality of Persons 
m the Divine essence, than the friends of that doctrine 
have done for its establishment. This may be easily ac- 
counted for on the principle, that man by nature is totally 
depraved. The enemies of divine truth, oppose it with. 



ID THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

all their heart; but the best of the saints are only its im- 
perfect friends; for they "are sanctified" but "in part." 

Sinners, however, are more consistent with themselves ; 
for as the Holy Scriptures state, they " ai&e wise to do evil ; 
but, to do good, they have no knowledge." The cause of 
error, has always been vindicated with ardor, and talents. 
When it is lost it is not, in general, for the want of an 
indefatigable, and learned defence. If there had never 
been any opposition to the doctrine of the Trinity, it is 
highly probable that the inspiration of the text before us 
would never have been called in question. It must be al* 
low 7 ed, that if it is the word of God, its divine authority 
ought to be vindicated on fair and candid principles. 

There is no place, in which a proper defence of the 
text in dispute is more necessary than in this town ; for 
opposition to the belief of a Triune God, has taken a 
strong stand here for a number of years. All, however, 
that has been said and written to prove that the passage 
before us is an insertion ; with all the concessions which 
h?ve been made by Trinitarians on the subject, have fail- 
ed of producing in my mind a conviction of its spurious- 
ness : I still believe it to be the fruit of divine inspira- 
tion — the real word of God. To shew the reasons for this 
belief, will be a leading object in the subsequent investiga- 
tion. I have no other apology for undertaking an exam- 
ination of this subject, than that it appears to be necessary, 
here ; and that I feel disposed to do it all the justice that 
lies within my power ; the extent of which must be sub- 
mitted to the candid judgment of my hearers. It would be 
inadmissible for me to boast, either of my talents or ad- 
vantages ; and to depreciate them, is unnecessary. I shall 
speak to you as unto wise men, whose province it is to 
judge according to the evidence laid before you. That 
the important subject may be fairly canvassed, it is de- 
signed, 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 11 

I. To explain the doctrine which is obviously contained 
in the text, 

II. Show its agreement with the Holy Scriptures in gen- 
eral. And, 

III. Adduce evidence for the divine authority of the pas- 
sage. In conformity with this plan, I am, 

I. To explain the doctrine which is obviously contain- 
ed in the text. 

To deny its inspiration, and then argue, as many do, that 
it is not a sufficient evidence of the Trinity in Unity, is an 
extraordinary and vain attempt. If it is an insertion, as 
the Anti-Trinitarians contend, it was surely the design of 
the inserter, to have it received as an unquestionable proof 
of that doctrine. If it were not in itself a decisive pas- 
sage, we have reason to believe, that there would have 
been less contention respecting it, in the christian world. 
Its real import, however, is very apparent, to the most 
superficial observer. 

In defence of its proper meaning, we may observe, 

1. That it speaks of three, who reside in heaven, who 
are expressly called, the Father, the Word, and the Holy 
Ghost. It will not be doubted, that the Father is that 
God, who possesses all possible perfection and glory. By 
the Word, the Son of God is undoubtedly intended, who 
is called the Lord Jesus Christ, and is the acknowledged 
Savior of men. He is frequently called the Word, in the 
Holy Scriptures. To labor this point, at present, is there- 
fore, unnecessary. It must be admitted that he is a real 
Person, and distinct from the Person of the Father. That 
these two are now in heaven, and were in it in the days 
of St. John, is a truth not to be doubted. 

The third Person mentioned in the text, is called the 
Holy Ghost. His personality is confessedly denied, by 
all who appropriate to themselves the dignified name of 



12 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

Unitarians. It is sufficient to my present purpose, how- 
ever, to show, that he is, in the passage before us, consid- 
ered as a Person, and distinct from the Father and the Son. 
To view the Holy Ghost, as being only an attribute, or op- 
eration of the Deity, when he is represented as actually 
bearing witness with two real Persons, is a thing utterly 
inadmissible. No doubt can remain, that the text in 
debate explicitly declares the doctrine of three distinct 
agents in heaven, who bear the glorious names of Fa- 
ther, Son, and Holy Ghost. This is all which is incum- 
bent on me to show;, under the present particular. 

2. These three illustrious Persons are said, in the text, 
to bear a distinct witness or record. To "bear record," 
is a solemn testimony. This is evident from that saying 
of John the Baptist respecting Jesus Christ, " I saw, and 
bear record, that this is the Son of God." A proper wit- 
ness must be a rational agent ; and on this ground it is said 
in scripture, " In the mouth of two or three witnesses ev- 
ery word shall be established." If the Holy Spirit is not 
a Person, but a divine perfection or energy, it is remark- 
able that this should be represented as bearing witness 
with tw r o real intelligent agents. It is very evident that 
this is not the meaning of the words in question. If the 
author intended to convey such an idea, he has given his 
readers no intimation of it, and on that account we must 
view him as having been very unhappy in the selection of 
his words. But, if he meant to speak of the Father, 
Son, and Holy Ghost, as three distinct Persons, or agents, 
then his language is perspicuous and forcible. If the text 
is an insertion, the inserter, undoubtedly, was a Trinita- 
rian, and intended to speak of these three witnesses in 
heaven as distinct agents. We need not hesitate in saying, 
that this is the literal and obvious import of the passage, 
whether it is viewed as spurious or genuine. To seltle 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. IS 

this point, is all that is necessary under the present subdi- 
vision ; and this, I may now consider as being sufficiently 
evinced. 

3. It is said in the text, that the " three who bear re- 
cord in heaven, are one" An understanding of this point 
is of vast importance ; and, therefore, a careful and clear 
explanation is requisite. It is not the design of the wri- 
ter, to inform his readers, that the three witnesses in hea- 
ven, are one, merely in respect to the truth of their testi- 
mony. He appears to be very particularly guarded on 
this point; distinguishing between the witnesses on earth, 
"the Spirit, the water, and the blood," and the "three 
who bear record in heaven." Concerning the first class 
»of witnesses, he says, "and these three are 'one ;" but of 
the second, he states, "and these three agree in one" 
That "the Spirit, the water, and the blood, are one, only' 
In regard to the nature and truth of their testimony, is 
clearly the object of the writer; for he does not say of 
the three who bear record in heaven, that "they agree in 
one'" but that they u are one" It is very mysterious to 
some people, as they say, to see how three can be one, and 
one three. Declining a humble and candid examination 
they have the temerity to pronounce the sublime doctrine 
of a Trinity in Unity, an absurdity— an absolute contra* 
diction. 

We are ready to acknowledge that this would be true, 
if it were said, that they are three and one, in the same 
sense ; but this is not the case. There is a sense in which 
they are really three, and there is a sense in which they 
are actually one. To communicate this incomprehensible 
and glorious mystery, was, undoubtedly, the serious inten- 
tion of the writer of 1 John 5. 7. No words could be 
better chosen, to 'express the doctrine of a Triune God. 
It has been the belief of Trinitarians, in all ages, thai: 



1% THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

the Almighty is one in essence, and three in Persons. 
The insinuation of Anti- Trinitarians, that we believe in 
a plurality of Gods, is either founded on the want of pro- 
ber information, or in real disingenuousness. We have 
no idea, that there are, or possibly can be, three distinct 
supreme Gods ; but we fully believe, that there are three 
distinct Persons, in the one eternal and infinite Jehovah. 
We wish to have no dispute with any sect of men, about 
the existence of more than one Supreme Being. The 
contest between us and those who wish to be distinguished 
by the name of Unitarians, is entirely about the manner 
of the divine existence, and not about the number of 
Gods. If our doctrine is as absurd and easily confuted, 
as they in general pretend, it is astonishing that they are- 
all so anxious to misrepresent it to the unthinking popu- 
lace. A misrepresented doctrine, we readily grant, may 
be easily confuted. Let them state our views fairly, on 
the sentiment in question, and then demonstrate from 
Scripture its fallacy, and the dispute will be completely 
settled, and their triumph will be worth enjoying. 

Ke that has a clear cause, would manifest great folly 
in resorting to misrepresentation and sophistry. Every 
disputant will be candid, who finds it possible to maintain 
his ground in that way ; for truth requires no subterfuges. 

In the view of what has been said, it appears with great 
clearness, that our text contains the common Trinitarian 
idea of God. It expressly states, that He is three and 
one — a Trinity in Unity. There is no attempt made by 
the writer of the text in debate, to show how the thing.is ; 
he^merely asserts the fact. We are bound, therefore, to 
believe, on the testimony of God, who certainly best 
knows, the mode of his own being. The practical use 
of the doctrine, is easily seen ; but the mystery of it re- 
mains unexplained, and probably wiH* through eternity 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 15 

The text perfectly accords with these memprable Words, 
in our excellent shorter catechism, " There is but one only, 
the living and true God; and there are three Persons 
in the Godhead, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; 
and these three are one God, the same in substance, equal 
in power and glory." 

With this explanation of the passage in debate, Ave may 
proceed to show, 

II. Its actual agreement with the Holy Scriptures in 
general. If it could be made to appear that the text in 
view obviously disagrees with the established doctrines of 
divine revelation, it would be a more conclusive evidence 
of its spuriousness, than any arguments which have ever 
been advanced by its opposers. Its obvious disagree- 
ment with their peculiar sentiments, is, unquestionably^ 
the grand reason of the general and pointed war which 
they have waged with it, through modern ages. If it can 
be clearly shown that the text in question, strictly accords 
with the doctrines of the Bible, it will be a strong pre- 
sumptive evidence of its inspiration. To establish this- 
point, will now be attempted. 

1. Is it said, in this passage, that there are three in hea- 
ven, called "the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost?"* 
This is manifestly the doctrine of the Scriptures at large. 
In the Old Testament, JEHOVAH expressly speaks of 
himself in the plural number- Gen. 1. 26. "And God 
said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness " 
Chap. 3. 22. " And the Lord God said, Behold, the man 
is become as one of us" At the erection of the tower of 
Babel, " The Lord said," in Gen. 11. 7, " Let us go down 
and there confound their language." It is also stated by 
Isa. 6. 8. " I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, " Whom 
;shall /send, and who will go for us." Notwithstanding 
.all the evasive explanations of Anti-Trinitarian writers. 



16 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

these passages of holy writ, are expressed in a very singu- 
lar phraseology, if God is, in no respect, more than one 
person. In particular that remarkable expression, " the 
man is become as one of us" There is no other way of 
evading its force, but by supposing that the infinite God, 
in this case, associates the angels with himself: But, it 
would be infinitely beneath the dignity of the Lord of 
Hosts, to associate with himself the most exalted of crea- 
ted beings, in so important a consultation as that which 
concerned the creation of man. It may truly be said in 
relation to that event, " Who hath known the mind of the 
Lord ? or who hath been his counsellor ?" 

If there are three Persons in one Godhead, the passages 
which have been quoted above, are phrased in a very pro- 
per manner ; but if the case is otherwise, they are framed 
in very strange and inadmissible language. The very 
names of the Father, Son, and Spirit, are certainly given to 
these divine persons, in the Old Testament Scriptures. 
Concerning God, it is said in Jer. 31. 9, "I am a Father 
to Israel ;" and in Mai. 11.10," Have we not all one Fath- 
er? hath not one God created us?" There is one men- 
tioned in the second Psalm, to whom it is said, in the 7th 
verse, " Thou art my son" To convince us that he pos- 
sesses divine perfections as well as the Father, it is said to 
mankind in the close of that Psalm, " Kiss the Son, lest he 
be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is 
kindled but a little." It is then added, " Blessed are all 
they that put their trust m him." Seeing, that we are 
strictly forbidden, to trust in any being in heaven or on 
earth but God, this command from on high, establishes 
the proper and eternal Deity of that glorious Person who 
is emphatically called the Son. 

With regard to him, who is denominated in the text, the 
Holy Ghost, which is but another name for Spirit, much is 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 17 

said in the Old Testament. In the 51 st Psalm David saith 
unto God, "Take not thy Holy Spirit from me." We 
read also, in Isa. 63. 10, " That Israel rebelled, and vexed 
God's Holy Spirit." The personality and eternal Deity of 
the Spirit, might be easily proved from the writings of 
Moses and the prophets ; but the present object is, simply 
to show, that the Jewish Scriptures agree exactly with 
the writer of 1 John, 5. 7, respecting the three who are 
in heaven, and the very names which they bear. I am 
not under the necessity, of proceeding any further, in dis- 
cussing this particular point in the general subject. 

The three who bear record in heaven, with their appro- 
priate names, are repeatedly and expressly mentioned in 
the New Testament. The Apostles were solemnly com- 
missioned to baptize the christian converts in the name of 
each Person in the Divine essence. The phraseology of 
their commission has a strict accordance with the very 
words of the text in question. The express words now 
referred to, are these, " Go ye — and teach all nations, 
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Ghost." It cannot be doubted, that the 
Father is largely spoken of in the Scriptures — that he is 
in heaven, and is truly God ; and so far, 1 John 5. 7, cer- 
tainly agrees with the Bible in general, ii The Son" 
who is called the M Word," in our text, is also called by 
that name, in several other places of the divine oracles. It 
is said, in the first chapter of John, "• In the beginning- 
was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the 
Word iv as God. The same was in the beginning with 
God. All things were made by him ; and without him 
was not any thing made that was made. In him was life » 
and the life was the light of men. This account exactly 
agrees with the statement of Moses, respecting the crea- 
tion of all tftings ; and the apostle John, evidently alludes 



18 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

to that portion of the sacred history. Moses writes, " In 
the beginning God created the heavens and the earth ;" 
and the apostle says, " In the beginning was the Word, and 
the Word was with God, and the Word was God." This 
apostolical assertion clearly explains the meaning of Mo- 
ses, in saying, " And God said, Let us make man in our 
image, after our likeness ;" and, " the man is become as 
one of us." 

The Word, is one of the names of the second Person, 
in the eternal and ever blessed Trinity. As St. John 
states, he was " in the beginning with God, and was God." 
That this glorious Word became personally united to the 
man Christ Jesus, appears with great clearness, from John 
1. 14. " And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt a- 
m ong us, and we beheld his glory." In 1 John 5. 7, it is 
said, that this mysterious Word is now bearing record in 
heaven, with the Father. That this Word is a Person, 
and not merely a perfection or energy of the Deity, very 
fully appears from Rev. 19. In that portion of Scripture, 
the writer says, " I saw heaven opened, and heboid, a 
white horse ; and he that sat upon him was called Faith- 
ful and True, and in righteousness doth he judge and 
make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his 
head were many crowns ; and he had a name written, 
that no man knew, but he himself. And he was clothed 
in a vesture dipped in blood : and his name is called, The 
Word of God." In a subsequent verse of this chapter, it 
is added, " And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a 
name written, KING OF £lNGS AND LORD OF 
LORDS." 

The above description can apply to no other being but 
the Almighty. The Word, therefore, was God, is now 
God, and will be God forever. In respect to the Father 
and Word, 1 John 5. 7, agrees perfectly with the Scrip- 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 19 

lures in general. We must likewise view the Holy Ghost 
to be a person, bearing record in heaven, as we are bapti- 
zed in his name, and by a divine command, as well as in 
the names of the Father, and of the Son. These three 
are also distinctly mentioned in that inspired benediction, 
" The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, 
and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all." 
The point under consideration, is, I think, fully evinced. 

2. Is it said, in our text, that "the Father, the Word, 
and the Holy Ghost, bear record in heaven ?" This is in 
perfect harmony with the general testimony of the Holy 
Scriptures. 

The grand truths, to which these divine Persons bear 
record, are, the Deity of the Son — his atonement, and 
the great salvation which results from these, to believers. 
The record of the Father, in respect to these things, is ex- 
pressly mentioned in Math. 3. 16, 17. After the baptism 
of Jesus, we read, " And lo, the heavens were opened un- 
to him : and lo, a voice from heaven, saying, This is my 
beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Another tes- 
timony of the Father, in respect to the Son, is recorded in 
Math. 17. The solemn scene was displayed on the 
mount ; and while Christ was transfigured, and Moses 
and Elijah appeared, the evangelist states, that a bright 
cloud overshadowed them : and behold, a voice out of the 
cloud which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am 
well pleased : hear ye him." We find another express witness 
of this nature, mentioned in John 12. 28. When Jesus 
was about being delivered up into the hands of his ene- 
mies, he said, " Father, glorify thy name. Then came 
there a voice from heaven, saying, I have glorified it, and 
will glorify it again." 

That the Word bears record in heaven, with the Father, 
appears from Acts 7. 56. In that passage, the dying Ste- 



20 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

phen says, " Behold, I see the heavens opened, and th£ 
Son of man standing on the right hand of God." The 
record which the Word bears in heaven, is likewise men- 
tioned in the ninth chapter of Acts. We are informed 
there, that as Saul journeyed to Damascus, to execute his 
persecuting intentions, " suddenly there shined round 
about him a light from heaven ;" and when he had fallen 
" to the earth, he heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, 
Saul, why persecutest thou me ? I am Jesus whom thou 
persecutest. It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks." 
The meaning of his communication, evidently, is, " You 
are opposing an infinitely glorious Being ; and destroying 
an important cause." The Word bears a farther testimo- 
ny to his own proper Deity, by proclaiming in the hearing 
of St. John, with a voice like the sound of a trumpet, " I 
am Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last" — " I am 
he that liveth, and was dead, and, behold, I am alive for*- 
ever more, Amen ; and have the keys of hell and of death*" 
Rev. 1.2, 18, 

The record which the Holy Ghost bears to the Deity of 
Christ, is also clearly stated in the Scriptures. This was 
done in his descending in the form of a dove, and resting 
on the head of Jesus. In respect to this, John the Bap- 
tist, testifies, "I saw the Spirit descending like a dove* 
and it abode upon him." The Holy Ghost bore a farther 
testimony from heaven, in favor of the Deity and atone^ 
ment of Christ, on the day of Pentecost, by filling the 
house, where his apostles were sitting, with " a sound from 
heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind ;" and resting on their 
heads, as cloven tongues of fire. Acts 2. 2, 3. By his Al- 
mighty operations, they were all inspired to proclaim sal- 
vation through Jesus Christ, to mankind. He is still 
bearing record from heaven, by awakening, regenerating* 
sanctifying and sealing the souls of men, to eternal glory. 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 



21 



The Scriptures do, therefore clearly represent the Fa- 
ther, the Word or Son, and the Holy Ghost, as bearing 
record in heaven, and thus co-operating in our salva- 
tion. 

Much more evidence of their united record, in and from 
heaven, might be easily adduced ; but sufficient has been 
said, to shew the agreement of 1 John 5. 7, with the H«- 
ly Scriptures in general. 




SERMON II. 

I JOHN, V. 7. 

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, 
the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are 
one. 

In the preceding discourse, this text was very particu- 
larly explained, in conformity with the first head of the 
grand division. We have also passed through a part of 
the second head, in showing the agreement of this dispu- 
ted passage with the Scriptures in general. Under the 
last mentioned division, it was evinced, 

1. That the Old Testament and the New, unite in de- 
claring with 1 John 5. 7, that there are three in heaven, 
bearing the names of the Father, of the Word, or Son, and 
of the Holy Ghost. It was likewise shown, 

2. In part, that the Scriptures at large agree, that 
the glorious three in heaven unite in witnessing to the divin- 
ity and atonement of the Word, and to the salvation of be- 
lievers through his powerful intercession. 

The way is now prepared to proceed with a farther il- 
lustration of this general head of the interesting subject. 
Therefore, 

3. Is it said in our text, that the three who bear re- 
cord in heaven, are one?" This is the united voice of all 
the sacred writings. 



THE AUTHENTICITY, &C. , 23 

The unity of God is an established doctrine in the in- 
spired volume, and is a dictate of natural as well as reveal- 
ed religion. It is said in the writings of Moses, " Hear, 
O Israel : The Lord our God is one LordP Deut. 6. 4. 
The great Jehovah saith, by Isaiah his prophet, "I am the 
Lord, and there is none else, there is no God beside me." 
Isa. 45. 5. This doctrine is clearly revealed in the Old 
Testament, from the commencement to the close. The 
New Testament exhibits the same important truth, with 
equal perspicuity. St. Paul, in his epistles, says, " To us 
there is but one God." 1 Cor. 8. 6. Again ; " For there 
is one God. 1 Tim. 2. 5. In Gal. 3. 20, he says also, God 
is oneP 

More testimony on this head, is unnecessary ; and we 
rejoice to find, that it has been the settled belief of pious 
and well informed minds, in all periods of time. In con- 
nexion with what has been said, we argue, If the Fa- 
ther, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, possess, each, un- 
derived existence, independence and unlimited perfections, 
it will necessarily follow that they are the same in essence, 
and one God. The unity of the Divine essence, and the 
Trinity of persons in God, are doctrines, revealed without 
any obscurity in the lively oracles of heaven. 

Is it said in 1 John 5. 7, — " These three are one ?" 
the Lord Jesus Christ himself, uses the same phraseology 
in John 10. 30 ;" " I and my Father are oneP He assures 
us in the 14th chapter of the same book, " He that hath 
seen me, hath seen the Father." " I am in the Father, 
and the Father in me.", 

In the 1st chap, and 18th verse, it is said, " No man hath 
seen God at any time ; the only begotten Son, which is 
in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." 

As it is asserted, that " no man hath seen God at any 
time ;" it must be the Father who is meant ; for, all who 



24 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

are conversant with the sacred writings, must know, that 
the God of Israel had often appeared unto men. 

In this view of the case, we may clearly perceive, that 
it was Christ who said unto Abraham, " I am the Almigh- 
ty God ; walk before me, and be thou perfect.'* In John 
1. 18. it is solemnly denied that any man had ever seen 
the Father ; but in Gen. 17. 1, it is clearly stated, " And 
when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the Lord 
appeared unto Abram and said unto him, I am the Al- 
mighty God." Christ, therefore, must be the Almighty 
God, on the fairest principles of reasoning. This being 
admitted, irresistibly proves that he is one with trm Father 
in essence, as well as testimony ; which is the very doc- 
trine contained in the text under consideration. If the Fa- 
ther and the Word, are two distinct Persons, in one simple 
essence, it is easy to see, that the Holy Ghost may al- 
so be a Person, in the same undivided Godhead. He is 
certainly ranked with the Father and the Word, in 1 John 
5. 7, as a distinct agent, but of the same substance, and 
equal in perfections and glory :— and with this statement, 
all Scripture agrees. 

The opposers of the Trinity profess to believe, that the 
Spirit is not a distinct Person in God, but is either one of the 
names of the Father, or else, merely one of his perfections 
or operations. But if their sentiment be correct, how 
shall we understand the commission which Christ gave to 
his ministers respecting baptism ? It must be understood 
in this sense, " You shall baptize your proselytes in the 
name of the Father, who is truly God, and in the name of 
the Son, who is a mere creature : and again, either in the 
name of the Father, or else, in the name of one of his 
attributes or operations. According to this doctrine, 
the same inconsistency and tautology is embraced in the 
apostle's benediction, with which divine worship is closed 
in all our congregations, 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 25 

It is to us, however, a consolation, that the whole Bible, 
accords with the statement made in 1 John 5. 7. That the 
Spirit is distinct from the Father and the Word, as a Per- 
son, and yet one with them in essence, and in every divine 
perfection and glory. We know, that the Holy Spirit is 
spoken of in all the Scriptures, as being God, possessing an 
eternal, independent existence, and almighty power. The 
apostle Peter said to Ananias, "Why hath Satan filled 
thine heart to lie unto the Holy Ghost ? — thou hast not lied 
unto men, but unto God." Acts 5. 3, 4. 

In respect to the duration of the Spirit's existence, St. 
Paul says, " How much more shall the blood of Christ, 
who through the eternal Spirit offered himself to God, 
purge your conscience from dead works, to serve the liv- 
ing God." If the Spirit is eternal, it sufficiently proves 
his independence, for there could be no antecedent being, 
to operate as a cause of his existence. To labor for far- 
ther proof on this point, would be a waste of time. 

That the divine Spirit possesses almighty power, the 
works ascribed to him expressly testify. In speaking 
of the creating power of Jehovah, Job says, " By his Spir- 
it he hath garnished the heavens." Job 26. 13. At the 
commencement of creation, Moses states, that " the Spirit 
of God moved upon the face of the waters." Gen, 1. 2. 
In relation to the great variety of pestiferous creatures, 
which were to devour the land of Edom, and to possess it 
forever, the prophet Isaiah says, God's " mouth it hath 
commanded, and his Spirit it hath gathered them." Isa. 
34 18. 

Creating the heart of man anew, is the work of the 
Spirit, and it is as great a work as the creating of the world, 
requiring no less power. It is said in John 3. 5. " Ex- 
cept a man be born of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the 
kingdom of God ;" and, that event is called by St. Paul, 

being " created in Christ Jesus unto good works." 
D 



26 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

But as Anti-Trinitarians contend that the Holy Spirit is 
either the Father himself, or his power personified, more 
evidence of this kind is unnecessary. If the things which 
have been mentioned of the Holy Ghost are true, and his 
distinct personality from the Father and the Word, has 
been m ide to appear, then the doctrine contained in our 
text agrees with the Scriptures ; which is now the only 
point in question. 

As that point is sufficiently settled, I shall proceed in 
conformity with my general plan, to adduce, 

III. The evidence of the divine authority of the text 
in dispute. 

From the view we have taken of the Scriptures in gen- 
eral, it fully appears, that our contested text, contains no 
false doctrine, whether it is spurious or genuine. This 
may be justly considered, as a strong presumptive argu- 
ment in favor of its inspiration. We are not, however, 
reduced to the necessity of resting its authenticity on that 
argument alone, although its weight is great. But in en- 
tering into a connected series of evidence, in favor of the 
divine authority of 1 John, 5. 7, we may observe, 

1. That its strict connection with the rest of the chap- 
ter, evinces this. 

If it were inserted by an uninspired pen, it would 
surely disturb and weaken the apostle's reasoning, instead 
of elucidating his subject, or strengthening his argument. 
This does not appear to be the case ; for, if the text were 
removed from its present position, the force of his reason- 
ing would be greatly enervated. It is evidently his ob- 
ject, in ver. 6, to shew, that " Jesus Christ come by wa- 
ter and blood." In this saying, he undoubtedly alludes to 
the blood and water, which issued from the Redeemer's 
side, when it was pierced with the spear. By that pre- 
cious blood, an atonement was made for sin ; and, the 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 27 

water was an emblem of the purifying influence of the 
Spirit, which is poured out on men, in consequence of his 
death on the cross. This contested passage, evidently 
holds a close connection with the last part of verse 6, and 
the whole of verse 8. In the first part of verse 6, the apos- 
tle says, " This is he that came by water and blood, even 
Jesus Christ ; not by water only, but by water and blood." 
The close of the verse says, " and it is the Spirit that bear- 
eth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three 
that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the 
Holy Ghost : and these three are one. And there are 
three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, the water, and 
the blood : and these three agree in one. 

The text in debate, stands connected with the preceding 
verse, by the word " for ;" and with the following verse, 
with the copulative conjunction, " and." It falls into its 
present position, therefore, with peculiar facility. 

It has been made to appear from the Scriptures in gen- 
eral, that there are three such witnesses in heaven, as are 
mentioned in verse 7 ; and, it certainly forms a strong 
and beautiful union in testimony, with the witnesses in 
earth, which are spoken of in verse 8. 

That we may perceive the force of this reasoning more 
fully, let the w r ords of verse 6 and verse 8 be stated, 
leaving out the supposed insertion :_—" This is he that 
came by water and, blood even Jesus Christ ; not by water 
only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that bear- 
eth witness, because the Spirit is truth. And there are 
three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, the water, and 
the blood : and these three agree in one?'' 

In reading the apostle's statement in this manner, there 
evidently appears to be a great deficiency ; but, in reading 
it with the pretended interpolation, there is neither false- 
hood nor redundency. Dr. Scott, in his note on the text, 



28 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

says, "It may be doubtful, whether the passage connects 
with so much propriety, if the contested words be omitted, 
as it otherwise does : for if we read with the copies in 
which they are wanting," " The Spirit beareth witness, 
because the Spirit is truth : for there are three that bear 
record, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood," &c. 
" there seems to be a remarkable repetition, and a want of 
the apostle's usual energy in the passage." 

I have seen this argument, set in a very powerful light 
by the pen of a learned Deist, in an address to Unitarians ; 
but, I cannot, at present, quote his words.* I shall now 
submit the point, to the judgment of my hearers, without 
pursuing it any farther, at present. 

2. It may be argued, that 1 John 5. 7, is a genuine text, 
from the similarity of the style and doctrine of St. John's 
other writings. In the very commencement of his gospel, 
he calls the Lord Jesus Christ the Word ; and he gives 
hinl the same appellation, in the book of Revelation. The 
Son of God, is not called the Word by any other sacred 
writer. 

It appears that this apostle, Was very particular in all 
his writings in teaching the personality, divinity, and re- 
cord, of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and, al- 
so, their Unity in one glorious essence. These facts, were 

* In connection with the above argument for the genuineness of this verse 
from the connection, another may be added which appears in the Greek, but 
is not seen in the English translation. In the last clause of the 8th verse, 
*' and these three agree in one," the article is used before one. Middleton, in 
bis essay on the Greek article, lays it down as a rule, that the article is used 
in such cases for one of two purposes, that of hypothesis or that of reference. 
It is plain that its use in this place cannot be hypothetic. It must therefore, 
be used by way of reference. But to what can it refer ? There is nothing to 
which i t can refer, if the 7th verse is left out. If that is inserted, the refer- 
ence is plain. The testimony of the three that bear witness on earth agrees 
in the same one thing which is asserted in the 7th verse, namely, the doctrine 
of the Trinity in Unity. ( See Panoplistfor 1 8 11 , p. 54 L 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 29 

fully substantiated, under the second general head of this 
subject. 

This apostle was also much in the habit of vindicating 
Christ's proper Deity, and equality with the Father. In 
1 John 5. 20, he says of him, "This is the true God, 
and eternal life." This completely establishes all that is 
contained in the text in question. 

But as the opposers of a Trinity in Unity, profess to es- 
teem the talents and candor of Dr. Doddridge, I shall cite 
a note of his, on the words, " This is the true God, and eter- 
nal life." He says, " To paraphrase this of the true reli- 
gion as a celebrated divine does, is quite enervating the 
force of Scripture, and taking a liberty with plain words, 
by no means to be allowed. It is an argument of the De- 
ity of Christ, which almost all those who have wrote in its 
defence, have urged, and which, I think, none who have op- 
posed it, have so much as appeared to answer." These re- 
marks are very pointed, and made by him, whom the Uni- 
tarians acknowledge to be candid, pious and learned. 
But, if the Deity of Christ be a Scriptural doctrine, the state- 
ment in 1 John 5. 7, stands as fast as the pillars of heaven. 
The style and doctrine, of this disputed passage, exactly 
agree with the style, character, and sentiment of St. JoTin. 
We have no right, therefore, to consider it as being an inser- 
tion, unless the thing can be positively proved, which, no 
one pretends, has ever been done. It is on the ground of 
negative proof, that its enemies are striving to erase it from 
the Bible. A learned divine^ observes, " Negative evi- 
dence has, in determining the judgment of a candid mind, 
but little weight. One positive fact, well supported, is of 
more importance than a thousand negations." 

In defending the authenticity of the text in debate, I 
proceed to observe, 



30 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

3. That there does not appear to have been any neces- 
sity, of committing such a forgery. If the text was inser- 
ted, it must have been done for the purpose of supporting 
the Trinity. No sufficient motive for this can be made to 
appear ; for the Scriptures in general, contain plenary ev- 
idence of that doctrine. Every one, who is not biassed 
against that glorious truth, must be convinced of it, by 
reading the Bible, independent of this contested text ; and 
those men who, lean to their own understanding, and 
prefer what they call reason, to Revelation, would not ac- 
knowledge the doctrine, if a thousand such passages as 1 
John 5. 7, were to be found in the Scriptures, and with- 
out any objection to their authenticity. 

Mr. Robinson, who was converted to Anti-Trinitarian- 
ism by Dr. Priestley, observes, in his " History of Bap- 
tism," page 47, concerning Unitarians, " The sufficiency of 
reason is the soul of their system." See Fuller's Letters, 
page 298. On this ground divine Revelation is unne- 
cessary ; and, whenever it is consulted, it must bow to the 
dictates of reason. To forge a passage, for the conviction 
of gentlemen of this cast, would amount to very little, for 
every doctrine of Scripture, must be tried at the bar of 
their own reasoning. Humble inquirers, however, will 
easily be convinced, that the doctrine of a Trinity in Uni- 
ty is, the Alpha and Omega of Revelation — the grand 
hinge, on which, every one of its doctrines turns. 

4. It is a powerful argument in favor of the passage in 
debate, that to have forged it, would have been a heinous 
crime, and attended with great danger. If there were any 
piety among the orthodox, when such a sentence was in- 
serted in the epistle of John; they would surely have de- 
tected and exposed the guilty. Such an addition to the 
Holy Scriptures, would have subjected the impious agent, 
or agents, to these solemn threatenings, in the book of 



I JOHxN V. 7, VINDICATED. SI 

God ; " For I testify unto every man that heareth the 
words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add 
unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that 
are written in this book." Rev. 22. 18. " Every word of 
God is pure." — " Add thou not unto his word, lest he re- 
prove thee, and thou be found a liar." Prov. 30. 5, 6. 
Surely, no one would be willing to expose himself to di- 
vine anger, and to the detestation and reproofs of men, who 
had any fear of God before his eyes ; and a man of differ- 
ent character, would have no motive to vindicate the doc- 
trine of the Trinity. Such an interpolater, must have 
anticipated these painful events. 

It is difficult to see, how it was any more possible to 
have inserted this passage in any past period of time, with- 
out being detected, than it would be at present. Friends 
and enemies, have always been eyeing the Holy Scriptures 
very closely. If any person, church, or, denomination, 
had in fact, made such an addition to the sacred canon, it 
must have been discovered, and he, or they, exposed to 
the merited contempt of the whole christian world. We 
ought not to think so meanly of the church of God, as that 
they would universally, and silently, have suffered such a 
criminal forgery, even, if all the enemies of truth had con- 
sented to shut their mouths, in respect to the crime. 

It is said by respectable authority, that the Jews were 
so careful in preserving their Scriptures from being corrupt- 
ed, "that, when copies of the Law or the Prophets were 
transcribed, they observed the most scrupulous exactness : 
they not only diligently compared the one with the other, 
but even counted the number of letters in each book, and 
compared and recorded the numbers." We need not doubt, 
but the christian church, has taken some care in this res- 
pect, as well as the Jewish church. The same Holy 
Providence has, no doubt, watched over the Scriptures in 



32 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

every age, to preserve them from corruption. The Lord 
of Hosts, is ''the Shepherd and the Stone of Israel ;" and, 
" he doth, neither slumber nor sleep," in guarding the con- 
cerns of his kingdom, and securing the honor of his own 
glorious and eternal name. 

5. The entire silence of Anti-Trinitarians, in ancient 
times, in relation to the spuriousness of the text in ques- 
tion, is an argument of great weight, in favor of its authen- 
ticity. 

We must believe, that if the text in debate, be an inter- 
polation, it is not of modern date. 

Mr. Emlyn, in his "Enquiry into the original authority 
of 1 John 5. 7," states, that the christian world, " had it 
not in their Bibles, for above 700 years." If this be a 
fact, it must have been inserted in some copy, or copies, of 
the sacred writings, as early as the beginning of the eighth 
century. On this calculation, it must have existed for as 
long as 1 000 years. This is a sufficient proof of my argu- 
ment, that if the passage has been inserted, it is an ancient 
crime. If there was no debate among christians at that 
time, about the doctrine of the Trinity, to insert such a 
text, was unnecessary : but, if that thing ivas then dispu- 
ted, those, who did it, would, undoubtedly, have proclaim- 
ed to the world its spuriousness. Justice to themselves, 
must have forbidden their silence. If such an event had 
transpired, there would have been some account of it trans- 
mitted down to us. A learned debate, on the authority of 
this passage, as far back as the 8th or 9th century, would 
throw great light on the subject. 

Many ancient manuscripts, existed then, which have 
since perished by the devouring hand of time. It is very 
possible, that the autograph of St. John, might have been 
then produced. No doubt the church, would have pre- 
served that, as an authentic copy, and as a memorial, of 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 33 

one of the dearest servants of our Lord Jesus Christ. A 
sight of the original, must have settled all controversy on 
the subject at once. As the Scriptures then, were all in 
manuscripts, and not very ancient, the difficulty might have 
been canvassed with more certainty, than it can be now. 
Perhaps, it was on that very account, that Anti-Trinitari- 
ans chose to let the matter rest, until a more auspicious age, 
should favor the undertaking. If they could show by au- 
thentic records, when this text was inserted, by what 
hands, and for what purpose, the victory would be their's. 
If the thing were as they pretend, this could be done ; 
but, as no one attempts it, we have a right to consider this 
controverted passage, as being genuine, until it is proved 
to be otherwise, by positive testimony. In examining 
this subject, it will be made to appear, that the evidence, 
on which, they set aside, the words in question, is purely 
negative ; and, to this, I hope, to be able to oppose much 
positive proof, in my next discourse. 

E 



SERMON III. 



I JOHN, V, 7. 

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father? 
the Word, and the Holy Ghost : and these three are one* 



On a former occasion, two discourses were delivered 
from this celebrated text. The general arrangement which 
was adopted in the outset of the subject was, to explain 
the doctrine contained in this passage — to show its agree- 
ment with the Scriptures at large — and then, adduce evi- 
dence for the divine authority of the text itself. 

The two first heads have been discussed, and some at- 
tention has been given to the third and last. Under that, 
it was argued. 

1 . That the divine authority of the text, appears from 
its strict connection with what precedes and follows it, in 
the chapter where it stands. 

2. From the similarity of the style and doctrine, with 
the style and doctrine of St. John's other writings. 

3. That there does not appear to have been any ne- 
cessity on the part of the Orthodox, of committing such 
a forgery. 

4. That to have forged the passage would have been 
a heinous crime, and attended with great danger. 

5. That the entire silence of Anti-Trinitarians, in an- 
cient times, in respect to the spuriousness of this text, is 






an argument of great weight in favor of its authenticity. 

The way is, therefore, prepared, to proceed to a further 
train of testimony, in favor of the divinity of 1 John 5. 7. 

In doing this, it will be proper to show, 

6. The grounds on which this passage is rejected, 
from the oracles of God. 

In attending to this point, I shall endeavor to observe 
candor and accuracy, as far as I have obtained light on the 
subject. It has been noticed already, that it is on the 
ground of negative proof, that this text is declared to be 
spurious. On that account, its enemies have been very 
confident; and, by their triumphant language, many of 
the Orthodox have been, I think, unnecessarily shaken 5 
in respect to its divine authority. 

The main evidence which lies against the text in ques- 
tion, is this : It is wanting in many of the ancient manu- 
scripts, and especially the Greek ; and it is omitted in ma- 
ny of the earlier versions of the Holy Scriptures. 

This fact we are not disposed to deny ; neither do we 
consider the argument derived from it as unanswerable ; 
and to this the attention of my hearers is now to be di- 
rected. 

The most famous manuscripts existing at present are 
only transcripts of more ancient ones, which have perished 
in the lapse of ages. It is very easy, therefore, to see, 
that transcribers might have left out this text through in- 
advertence, or with a wicked design of embarrassing the 
doctrine of the Trinity. An omission in one manuscript, 
might have occasioned the want of this text in many others 
which were subsequently written. No doubt, many man- 
uscripts and versions of the Scriptures, have been formed 
from the Alexandrian and Vatican copies, in which, this 
text, from some reason or other, has been omitted. It is 
a fact, well authenticated, that some of the ancient manu- 



36 THE AUTHENTICITY OP 

scripts have had this text in them, and that others have ap- 
peared, and still appear without it. 

The Rev. William Jones, author of " The Catholic 
doctrine of a Trinity," in page 224 of " the first Amer- 
ican edition," observes, " The divines of Lovain, having 
compared many Latin copies, found this text wanting but 
in five of them ; and Robert Stephens found it retained in 
nine out of sixteen ancient manuscripts which he used." 
The probability is surely as great, that where this text is 
wanting in the ancient manuscripts and versions of Scrip- 
ture, it might have been omitted through inadvertence, or 
erased with design, as that it was inserted in the copies 
where it was or is found. It is a fact, well known from 
ancient history, that many Anti-Trinitarians appeared very 
early in the Christian Church, whose hearts were highly 
embittered against the doctrine of the Trinity, and the su- 
preme Deity of Christ. Ebion, Cerinthus, and Mareion, 
who had many followers, lived in and near the days of the 
apostles ; and they were violent opposers to the doctrines 
which have been mentioned. Milner, in his Church His- 
tory, observes concerning them, "While they acknow- 
ledged the excellence of the character of Jesus Christ, 
they considered him a mere man, descended from Mary 
and her husband Joseph. With such low ideas of the 
Redeemer's person, they denied the virtue of his atoning 
blood, and labored to establish justification by the deeds 
of the law. To be consistent with themselves, they re- 
jected the divine authority of St. Paul's Epistles, and ac- 
cused the apostle of being an Antinomian." See " Town- 
send's abridgment of Milner, page 56. Men of this de- 
scription were full as likely to have erased 1 John, 5. 7. 
from the ancient manuscripts, as the orthodox Christians 
were to have inserted such a text. I am, however, of the 
opinion, that it was neither omitted nor inserted in that 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 37 

period of time. There is no such charge exhibited against 
those ancient heretics by the Orthodox ; neither do we 
find them complaining of such an addition having been 
made to the Holy Scriptures by their opponents. The 
original copy was, at that period, undoubtedly, in the pos- 
session of the Church ; and a sight of it must have com- 
pletely settled such a controversy. It was, therefore, an 
inauspicious era, to have omitted or inserted the passage 
under consideration. But, if either of these things was 
done, I think an omission of the text in writing manu- 
scripts, the most probable, for these two weighty reasons, 
namely : First, The character of the Orthodox for piety, 
and veracity, we must believe, was not inferior to that of 
the Anti- Trinitarians ; Secondly, It was more safe to omit 
a passage in transcribing the Scriptures, than to make and 
insert one. If such an omission had been noticed, and 
protested against, a very plausible apology could have 
been offered ; namely, that it was a mistake, and not de- 
signed. No such plea could possibly have been made 
for an interpolator. The weakest reasoner on earth, must 
have seen at once, that from the guilt of such an action, 
it would have been impossible for him to have washed his 
hands. It is the most probable thing, therefore, that the 
early manuscripts of the New Testament were all either 
with or without, this contested passage. But, after the 
early manuscripts were all buried in the grave of time, 
and transcriptions had become numerous, no doubt it was 
then, that this text was either omitted or inserted. None 
of the ancient manuscripts, which are now in being, reach 
within many hundred years of the apostolic age. As the 
art of printing was then unknown, manuscripts of the 
Bible would be the most likely to increase, when the 
Christian religion was established in the Roman Empire, 
and had diffused itself extensively in the world. A mul- 



38 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

tiplicity of transcriptions of the Holy Scriptures was then 
more practicable and necessary, than in any antecedent 
period. After the establishment of the Christian religion 
in the Roman Empire, Anti-Trinitarianism became very 
prevalent. Then the famous Arius arose, covering the 
Christian horizon with a cloud of Anti-Trinitarian delu- 
sion. He was, indeed, greatly opposed by the Orthodox, 
and by Constantine the Great ; yet his sentiments spread 
extensively, and finally obtained a legal establishment. 
The sons of the Arian school were then under peculiar ad- 
vantages to omit and erase the text which is now in debate. 
Concerning this passage, Dr. Scott observes, "It is cer- 
tainly wanting in many of the ancient versions and man- 
uscripts : but whether the Trinitarians interpolated it, or 
the Arians and other Unitarians omitted it, is to this day 
a matter of controversy." He adds, " It is, however, 
more probable that the Anti-Trinitarians should silently 
omit, in their copies a testimony that was so decisive 
against them, or that it should be left out by the mistake 
of some ancient transcriber, than that the Trinitarians 
should directly forge and insert it." Ecclesiastical history 
testifies, that Anti-Trinitarianism prevailed in the Chris- 
tian world, through the greater part of the fourth century, 
and almost the whole of the fifth. The votaries of that 
deleterious scheme, made every possible effort to crush the 
orthodox religion, and to promote their own views of the- 
ology. They had two distinguished sovereigns, who fa- 
vored their cause, Constantius and Huneric. While the 
Arians were crimsoning the earth with the blood of or- 
thodox Christians, and banishing their leading men into 
deserts and caves, we may well suppose that they would 
take some liberty also with the Holy Scriptures. In re- 
lation to this subject, Milner, in his Ecclesiastical History 
states, that " Huneric ordered, that no one should hold any 



str; 
to 
trt 
I sa } 

u 1 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 39 

office in his dominions, who was not an Arian. He con- 
fiscated the property of the rejected Orthodox, and ban- 
ished their persons. In the year 483, he commanded the 
Trinitarian ministers to meet the Arian clergy, at Carthage 
in Africa, to prove their faith, if they could, by the Scrip- 
tures. " When they assembled at the appointed place, our 
historian says, " Huneric made no mention of the confer- 
ence, for many days, and separated those of the greatest 
abilities from the rest, that he might on false pretences, 
put them to death. One of the most learned, named 
Laetus, he burned alive, to intimidate others. When the 
conference was opened, the Orthodox chose ten of their 
own number to answer for the rest. Cirila, the chief of 
the Arian bishops, was seated on a magnificent throne, 
with his partizans sitting in an exalted station, while the 
Orthodox continued standing below. The latter saw 
what a mock conference it was likely to prove, and remon- 
strated: — the Arians ordered one hundred bastinadoes 
to be given to each of them." Under such disingenuous 

atment, poor Eugenius, lifted up his voice to heaven, 
saying, "God look down upon the violence offered us!" 
( They, however, presented a confession of their faith, in 
terms, expressive of Trinitarian doctrine." After this 
awful scene, " Huneric ordered them to be expelled from 
Carthage, stripped them of horses and change of raiment, 
and forbad any one to give them victuals or lodgings, un- 
der terrible penalties." 

We may well suppose that such people were full as likely 
to omit, in transcribing, and to erase from the then exist- 
ing manuscripts of Scripture, 1 John 5. 7, as the Ortho- 
dox were to insert it ; seeing that of such an interpolation, 
there is not the shadow of positive proof. 

The evidence, on which this text is rejected from the 
Holy Scriptures, has now been presented to your view. 



40 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

at least as far as I am possessed of it, and, with the re- 
marks which have been made on it, you must judge of its 
weight This right is yours. I shall now proceed to 
state, 

7. The opinions of some eminent commentators and 
divines, in respect to the authenticity of the text in ques- 
tion. That excellent Christian and divine, Dr. Doddridge, 
appears to be undetermined hi respect to the sacred au- 
thority of this passage, but professes to have a full belief 
in the doctrine which it contains. He says, " I am per- 
suaded the words contain an important truth ; but whether 
they have been added by some, or omitted by others, con- 
trary to the original copy, I will not pretend to deter- 
mine." See his Family Expositor, Vol. 6, page 311. 
Dr. Scott's mind preponderates in favor of the divinity of 
the passage ; rather choosing to believe, that " the Arians 
omitted it, in the copies where it is wanting, than that the 
Orthodox inserted it." For this opinion, he gives the fol- 
lowing reasons, namely, that "the Trinitarian, in fact, 
would be deprived only of one argument, with which he 
might attempt the conviction of his opponent, if this were 
rejected as spurious ; but if the testimony were admitted as 
the unerring word of God, all the ingenuity or diligence 
of his opponents, would scarcely suffice to explain it away, 
or to avoid the inference that must naturally be drawn 
from it, except by rejecting the apostle's testimony. 

The celebrated Matthew Henry, in his commentary on 
the Scriptures, is full in his belief of the divinity of this 
text, and his remarks in its vindication, are copious and 
powerful. I have not had an opportunity of consulting 
Pool's Annotations on this text; but according to infor- 
mation, he is expressly in favor of its authenticity. The 
Rev. John Brown, of Haddington, author of the Family 
Bible, seem* to have the highest confidence of the di- 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 41 

vine authority of the text under consideration ; comment- 
ing upon it, without taking the least notice of the contro- 
versy. 

Dr. Emmons, who is an eminent divine, has pub- 
lished a sermon on this passage, without calling its inspi- 
ration in question. Surely, he would not have done this, 
if any scruple had rested on his mind, respecting its au- 
thenticity. His opportunity for information on this sub- 
ject, and his ability to judge, are far from being small. 

The famous Claudius Buchanan, D. D. author of " The 
Christian Researches," who has travelled extensively in 
the Eastern nations, with the view of making discoveries 
in favor of the Christian cause, expressly avows his belief 
in the genuineness of 1 John 5. 7. 

The Rev. William Jones, in his " Catholic Doctrine of 
a Trinity," says, of this text, " I firmly believe it to be 
genuine for the following reasons: — 1. St. Jerom,. who 
had a better opportunity of examining the true merits of 
the cause than we can possibly have at this distance of time, 
tells us plainly, that he found out how it had been adultera- 
ted, mistranslated and omitted on purpose to elude the truth. 
2. The Divines of Lovain having compared many Latin 
copies, found this text wanting but in jive of them ; and 
Robert Stephens found it retained in nine out of sixteen 
manuscripts which he used. 3. It is certainly quoted 
twice by St. Cyprian, who wrote before the council of 
Nice : and also by Tertulliaii. Dr. Clark, therefore, is 
not to be believed when he tells us, it was never cited by 
any of the Latins before St. Jerom. 4. The sense is not 
perfect without it ; there being a contrast of three witnes- 
ses in heaven to three upon earth, the Father, the Word, 
and the Holy Ghost, whose testimony is called the witness 
of God ; and the Spirit, the water and the blood, which 
being administered by the church upon earth, is called the 



42 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

witness of men. He that desires to see this text farther 
vindicated from the malice of Faustus Socinus, may con- 
sult Pool's Synopsis, and Dr. Hammond; and also Dr. 
Delany, in his sermons." See the " Catholic Doctrine of 
a Trinity," page 124. By examining that page, you will 
find references made by Mr. Jones, to the proper author- 
ities. 

In addition to what has been said, I would just observe , 
that of the two authors, who have been mentioned by 
Mr. Jones, Cyprian and Jerom, the first lived in the third, 
and the second in the fifth century. Their testimony, 
therefore, is of great weight, in respect to the authenti- 
city of the text in question. 

It may, perhaps, shake the authority of the text in the 
view of some, that Mr. Wardlaw has not made use of it, 
in his discourses on the Socinian controversy. To this I 
reply, that he has not pronounced it to be an interpola- 
tion. He has not, indeed, grounded any argument upon 
it, because it. was not his design to rely on any passage, 
to which an objection might be offered with a plausible 
appearance. 

We admit that it is the opinion of the learned Gries- 
bach, that 1 John, 5. 7, is an insertion ; and no doubt this 
lias shaken many minds, in respect to its authenticity. 
But with all his critical talents, and laborious investigation, 
he is not above the possibility of being mistaken. Many 
great and good men differ from him on this subject. But, 
I shall proceed, 

8. To offer more proofs of the authenticity of this text, 
taken from ancient and authentic documents. These will 
be selected from the works of the Rev. George Travis. 
A. M. a distinguished Episcopalian divine. He commen- 
ces by mentioning the writings of certain ancient and 
learned individuals, He says, "Laurentus Valla, an Ital- 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 43 

ian nobleman, of great erudition, was the first person who 
set himself to correct the Greek manuscripts of the New 
Testament. He lived in the fourteenth century, and by 
long continued exertions, he got into his hands seven 
Greek manuscripts. This passage of St. John was found 
in them all In a commentary upon the Scriptures, by 
Nicholas De Lyra, this verse is found, accompanied by 
the learned author's annotations without expressing any 
suspicion of its authenticity. 

In the thirteenth century, the commentary of St. Thom- 
as appeared on this epistle, in which this verse is expound- 
ed without any insinuation of interpolation. In the same 
century, this text is found in the Rationale of divine offi- 
ces, composed by the Bishops of Mende. In the twelfth 
century, Lombard, Bishop of Paris, expressly cites this 
verse, in the first book of his Sentences. It is quoted in 
the same century, by an eminent divine, in a treatise on 
the glorification of the Trinity. St. Bernard, in the ele- 
venth century, insists on the verse, in several of his dis- 
courses. In, or about this age, Radulphus, Ardens, Huge 
Victorinus, with other authors, whose works have sur- 
vived to the present time, referred to the text in question. . 
The Glossa Ordinaria, was composed by a learned writer 
in the ninth century. In it, this verse is found, and com- 
mented upon with admirable force and perspicuity. The 
Greek manuscripts, which directed him to insert this verse in 
his text and commentary, must have been very ancient, not 
less than three or four hundred years old. It is thought that 
this famous commentary stands on the authority of Greek 
manuscripts more ancient than the Alexandrian manu- 
script, or any one now known in the world. Ambrose 
Ansbert, in the middle of the eighth century, wrote a com- 
ment upon the Apocalypse, in which this verse is applied, 
in explaining the 5th verse of the first chapter of the Rev- 



44 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

elation. Etherius, Bishop of Uxome, in contending 
against the heretical opinions of Elipondus, quotes this 
verse in St. John. In the middle of the sixth century, 
Cassiodorus, wrote a commentary on the epistles, and in 
his annotations on this chapter, uses these words :— " In 
heaven, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and 
these three are one God" Fulgentius, an African Bishop 
of great celebrity, who lived in the beginning of the sixth 
century, cited this text as being a conclusive evidence 
against the tenets of Arius. A few years before Fulgen- 
tius, Vigilius another eminent Bishop, urges the testimo- 
ny of this text against the Arian heresy. 

" The famous Jerom, who lived in the biginning of the 
fourth century, in revising and settling the text, of the 
New Testament, solemnly declared, that he had adhered 
entirely to the Greek manuscripts ; and in his Testament, 
this verse appears, without any doubt of its authenticity. 
He quoted it likewise, in his solemn confessions of faith. 

"Augustine, a cotemporary of Jerom, in his writings, 
uses these expressions — "the Father, and the Son, and 
the Holy Ghost are one" About the same period of time, 
Marcus Celedensis, an African, in an exposition of the 
Christian faith, expresses himself thus : " To us there is 
one Father, and one Son, who is truly God, arid one Holy 
Spirit, who is also truly God; and these three are one:" — 
the precise words of the verse in question. Phebadius 
was Bishop of Agen in Terence, in the fourth century. 
He cites this verse against the Arians. Cyprian, Bishop 
of Carthage, in 248, in a treatise, uses these words:— "It 
is written of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit — 
And these three are one" Tertullian, who is supposed to 
have been born about the time of St. John's death : or in 
the year 140, as some believe, in writing against one who 
denied a plurality of persons in the Godhead, alleges this 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 45 

passage in St. John. — " which three are one" — a literal 
quotation of the text in debate." 

Thus, in the documents which have been produced, we 
have an account of no less than twenty-three authors, of 
great eminence, who lived from the second down to the 
fourteenth century, who all cited and referred to this dis- 
puted text. This, I think, is sufficient to satisfy the most 
doubtful mind. 

But, to the evidence of individuals of such eminence, 
Mr. Travis, subjoins the testimony of councils, and other 
collective bodies of learned men. 

He says, " The council of Lateran was held at Rome, 
under Innocent III. in 1215. Of all the assemblies, of 
this kind, the Christian world ever saw, this was the most 
numerous. It was composed of more than four hundred 
Bishops, with about eight hundred inferior clergy, and 
an equal number of deputies. The Greek Patriarchs of 
Constantinople and Jerusalem, were present. The chief 
purpose of convening this council, was, for the examina- 
tion of certain opinions of a famous Italian divine, who 
was accused of Arianism. He was unanimously con- 
demned by this august body, in whose public act, we find 
the verse now in question, set forth in these words : — " It 
is read in the canonical epistle of St. John, that, there are 
three who bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, 
and the Holy Spirit ; and these three are one." 

" About the close of the eighth century, the Emperor 
Charlamagne, called together the learned of that age — 
instructing them to revise the manuscripts of the Bible 
then in use. — To" effect this great purpose, he furnished 
these commissioners with every manuscript that could be 
procured in his 'extensive dominions. In their correcto- 
rium, the result of their united labors, the testimony of the . 
three heavenly witnesses is read, without the smallest im- 
peachment of its authenticity. 



46 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

111 the famous conference at Carthage, which has been 
already mentioned, the Orthodox in their own defence, 
left this protest,-—" That it may appear more clear than 
the light, that the divinity of the Father, the Son, and the 
Holy Ghost, is one, see it proved by the Evangelist St. 
John, who writes thus : " There are three who bear record 
in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit ; and 
these three are one" 

This verse of St. John, is inserted in the ancient ser- 
vice-book of the Latin church; in the confession of faith 
of the Greek church, and in their liturgy. The ancient 
version of the New Testament, in the Armenian language, 
contains this verse. The most ancient of all the versions 
of the books of the New Testament, from the language 
in which they were originally written, is the Old Italic. 
This version was made in the first century, and, therefore, 
while St. John was yet alive; and was used by all the La- 
tin churches in Europe, Asia, and Africa, for many cen- 
turies after his death. 

"Thus, the origin of the verse in question, is, at length, 
carried up, not by inferences, or implications, alone, how- 
ever fair and obvious, but by plain and positive evidence, 
to the age of St. John himself. For this most valuable, 
as well as most ancient version hath constantly exhibited 
the verse, 1 John, 5. 7, throughout the vast series of one 
thousand and four hundred years, which intervened be- 
tween the days of Praxeas, and the age of Erasmus, not 
a single author whether Patripassian, Cerinthian, Eb- 
ionite, Arian, Macedonian, Sabellian, whether of the Greek 
or Latin, whether of the Eastern, or Western church — 
whether in Asia, Africa or Europe — hath ever taxed the 
various quotations of this verse — with 'interpolation or 
forgery. Such silence speaks, most emphatically 
speaks, in favor of the verse, now in dispute." See Tra- 
vis's works, page 319 and 320. 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. ¥i 

" The result, then, of the whole, is, — that the verse in 
question, seems, beyond all degree of serious doubt, to 
have stood in this epistle, when it originally proceeded 
from the pen of St.- John. 

" In the Latin, or Western church, the suffrages of Ter- 
tullian, and Cyprian, of Marcus Celedensis, and Phaba- 
dius, in its favor, aided by the early, the solemn, the pub- 
lic appeal to its authority, by the African Bishops under 
Huneric ; the preface, Bible, and conscripta-fides, of Je- 
rom ; the frequent, and direct citations of the verse by 
Eucherius, Augustine, Fulgentius, Vigilius, and Cassio- 
dorius: — these, supported, as to the Greek, or Eastern 
churches, by the dialogue between Arius and Athenasius, 
as well as by the synopsis of this epistle — by the Arme- 
nian version, which was framed from Greek manuscripts; 
by the very early, and constant use of the Apostolos in 
the same Greek church, and by its public confession of 
faith : All these evidences, arising within the limit of the 
sixth century, to pass over the immense accumulation of 
testimony which has been produced subsequent to that 
era, offering themselves to the test of the judgment, com- 
bined in one point of view, unchecked by a single nega- 
tion, unrebuked by any positive contradiction, unresisted 
by the smallest direct impeachment of the authenticity of 
the verse, throughout all the annals of all antiquity : All 
these circumstances seize the mind, as it were, by violence, 
and compel it to acknowledge the verity, the original ex- 
istence of the verse in question. 3 ' Travis's works, page 
344—346. 

To the evidence which has been advanced by Mr. Tra- 
vis, I will add a brief statement of facts, from the writings 
of Dr. Gill. He says, " Concerning this text, there has 
been a dispute whether it is genuine or not. It is objec- 
ted, that some of the ancient fathers did not quote it. 



48 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

But what then? others did; and a sufficient number of 
them to prove it genuine. It is quoted by Fulgentius 
against the Arians in the beginning of the sixth century, 
without the least scruple or hesitation. ' It is found in Je- 
rom's translation, which was made near the close of the 
fourth century. It is quoted by Athanasius, about the 
fourth, and by Cyprian about the middle of the third cen- 
tury. It is manifestly referred to, by Tertullian, in the 
beginning of the third, and by Clemens of Alexandria, 
toward the close of the second century. Thus it is to be 
traced up within one hundred years, or less, of the time 
when the epistle was written. This ought surely, to sat- 
isfy any one, that the passage is genuine. There never 
was any dispute about it, until Erasmus left it out, in the 
first edition of his translation of the New Testament; and 
yet he himself, upon the credit of an old British copy, put 
it into another edition of his translation." The Dr. adds, 
"Yea, the Socinians themselves, did not dare to leave it 
out, in their German Racovian version, which was made 
in 1630." See Dr. Gill's body of divinity,- vol. 1, page 
198. 

It will be readily perceived, that Dr. Gill, has only 
given us a condensed view of the evidence, adduced by 
Mr. Travis ; with the additional testimony of Clemens ; 
and the Socinians, feeling the necessity of retaining the 
text in debate, in their own version. But, as Clemens 
lived in the close of the second century, his quoting the 
words, is a solid proof that they are genuine. 

The Rev. Caleb Alexander says, in the appendix of his 
"essay on the Deity of Christ," "We are very happy 
that it is in our power to produce very direct and peremp- 
tory testimonies, to establish the originality and authenti- 
city of this disputed text. For these testimonies we are 
indebted to the judicious and learned works of the Rev, 



X JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. £9 

George Travis, A. M. Prebendary of Chester, and Vicar 
of Eastham, who, in his letters to Edward Gibbon, Esq, 
has rescued this text from the hands of its adversaries,, 
and conferred on the church an obligation of the liveliest 
gratitude and love." Alexander's Essay on the Deity of 
Christ, page 62. 

Thus, I have now, my hearers, laid before you the evi- 
dence I intended, relative to the divinity of 1 John, 5. 7. 
The inferences, naturally arising from the subject, must ne- 
cessarily be omitted, until the next occasion. They will 
fee sufficiently interesting and copious, to form an entire 
discourse. I shall, therefore, close this sermon, with that 
apostolical injunction, " Contend earnestly for th© fai f th ? 
wliich was once delivered to the saints," 

G 



SERMON IT. 

I JOHN, V, 7. 

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father* 
the Word, and the Holy Ghost : and these three are 
one. 




In the three preceding Sermons, -the general proposi- 
tions which were deduced from this passage, have been 
discussed. In illustrating them, we have seen the doctrine 
which the text contains — its agreement with the Scrip- 
tures at large — and the evidence of its divine author- 
ity. It only remains, to close the subject with an appro- 
priate improvement. And, 

1. In the light of what has been said, I think, we are 
fully warranted to receive 1 John, 5. 7, as the real word 
of God. The evidence alleged against it, that it is not 
found " in many of the ancient versions and manuscripts,' 5 
has, in some measure, been accounted for ; and, as we 
have seen positive proof of its existence in every age, up 
to the very period, in which, St. John lived, we may rest 
fully satisfied. It has been shown, that " the Italic ver- 
sion, which was made in the first century, contained this 
text, and was for many centuries, used by all the Latin 
churches in Europe, Asia and Africa. The text in ques- 
tion, must have had a being when it was put into the ver^ 



THE AUTHENTICItY, &C. 51 

Bion under consideration. If it had been forged, the ini- 
quity must then have been at once detected by the original 
manuscript ; and, even, by the voice of its author, who 
was probably, still alive. 

It is inadmissible to suppose, that the Latin churches 
would have received a text as inspired, which was not to 
be found in the apostle's autograph, nor in the manuscripts 
used in the Greek churches. Its being referred to by Cy- 
prian and Clemens, in the third and second centuries, very 
fully shows, that it was received by the Christian world 
then, as the pure word of God. The want of this text, 
in a thousand manuscripts and versions, which have been 
made subsequent to the third and fourth centuries, cannot 
destroy this positive testimony in its favor. As it contains 
a doctrine, clearly revealed in the Holy Scriptures ; it is al- 
so a strong proof of its authenticity, to an orthodox mind* 
No evidence, however, arises from that consideration, in 
the view of those, who do not allow that the Trinity, and 
the Divinity of Christ, are truths revealed in the Bible. 
It is no wonder, that with such sentiments, they should 
doubt the inspiration of 1 John 5. 7, nor, that they should 
exert themselves to prove it spurious. 

If a text w r ere to be found in the Scriptures, opposite te 
their express defines, we would undoubtedly, on that very 
account, question its authority. Men, therefore, who 
think, that this is the only passage, which speaks of a Trin- 
iy in Unity ; will naturally consider its very contents, as 
being evidence of its spuriousness. Nothing short of pos- 
itive testimony can convince them of its divine original.' 
That, however, has, I think, been fully exhibited. I shall*' 
therefore, consider myself justified in quoting the text, 
as evidence of a Triune God ; unless greater proof of ifes 
fallacy can be made to appear, than I have ever yet seen. 
In itself, it bears the-eharacteristics of inspiration, strongly 



£2 t£e authenticity OP 

supported by external positive testimony. These things 
are sufficient to satisfy us, who are fully convinced, that 
three divine Persons exist in one undivided essence. This 
is our faith ; and it is built on solid evidence, independent 
cf the text in dispute. We do not contend for it, as a pas- 
sage, on which the belief of a Trinity solely depends ; 
but as a part of divine revelation, of which we ought ever 
to be tenacious. To say with some writers, that " we can 
do without it," is no proper reason for consigning it to that 
grave, in which its enemies conceive it to be now laid. 
No part of the Sacred Oracles, may be consistently deemed 
unnecessary. " Every word of God is pure;" and, it 
should neither be added to, nor diminished. Infinite 
wisdom best knows, what is necessary to the perfection of 
Scripture, and what is not. If one half of the Bible were 
annihilated, in the Other, every gospel truth would have 
ample support ; nevertheless, the loss would be incalcula- 
ble. There is no reason, therefore, in being any less en- 
gaged to defend 1 John 5. 7, than if the doctrine of the 
Trinity depended On its single authority. The Christian 
church,is under indispensable obligation to contend for every 
verse and word, in the book of God. As the text in view 
contains a doctrine of vital importance in the divine sys- 
tem, we ought never to relinquish it, wit!^<it plenary evi- 
dence of its spuriousness. 

2. From what bas been said on this subject, we must 
be convinced, the text in debate is an irresistible proof of 
three Persons in one God. 

There is no other text in the Sacred volume, in which, 
the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity, is so expressly decla- 
red. In this single passage, the sense of many others, is 
condensed, and expressed with peculiar happiness and en- 
ergy., We need not be surprised, therefore, that Anti-Trin- 
itarians have been so industrious to sink its authority. 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 53 

It cannot be mistaken, in respect to the Persons in God ; 
for, they are distinctly mentioned, by the appropriate names 
of "the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost." In 
relation to the Unity of the essence, the text is sufficiently 
clear ; although this has been disputed by some learned 
and orthodox divines. 

Among the dissenters from this construction of the ter- 
minating clause of the text, " these three are one" we find 
Beza, Calvin, Dr. McKnight, and Dr. Wall. I do not 
know of any other distinguished Trinitarians, of their opin- 
ion in this respect. But with due defference to the judg- 
ment of these brilliant lights in the church, we are war- 
ranted to dissent from their conclusions, in the case before 
us. Taking into view the orthodox churches and clergy 
at large, more than a thousand to one have been and now 
are, of the opinion, that the clause in view, is expressive of 
the Unity of the divine essence. 

No doubt it means likewise, that the three divine Per- 
sons, are united in their testimony concerning Christ and 
his salvation ; but that does not exclude the other impor- 
tant signification. The general suffrage of common sense, 
is in favor of the highest construction which is put upon that 
union. It appears very clearly, that the Anti-Trinitarians, 
as well as the Orthodox, take the words in their highest 
import 

If 1 John 5. 7, expresses nothing Wit a union of tes- 
timony, it would afford no evidence against the Anti- 
Trinitarian system ; it would, therefore, be useless for 
them to exert themselves with such persevering energy to 
silence its voice. If any man have an important cause in 
a court of justice, and a witness is like to appear against 
him, whose testimony would prove fatal to his case ; his 
mterest would naturally lead him to destroy the character 
*t>f that witness? in regard to veracity ; but if the testimo- 



54 ME AUTHENTICITY OF 

ny of that witness could in no sense injure his cause, he 
would be loath to take the trouble to shake his character 
in point of truth, let his veracity be ever so vulnerable* 
The zeal and perseverance of Anti-Trinitarians, to over- 
throw the authenticity of the text, is a decided evidence of 
their conviction, that its literal and obvious import is 
against them. If they mean to contend for an exposition 
of it, which does not clash with their scheme, it is vain to 
argue against its divine authority ; for that must induce the 
world to believe, that they themselves really think other- 
wise. The opinion of men in general, in all ages, ortho- 
dox and heterodox, has been in favor of that construction of 
the text, which is given in my first sermon. No sen- 
tence could be framed in so few words, more clear in its 
import, in relation to the doctrine of the Trinity in Uni- 

3. From what has been said we learn, that some ortho- 
dox divines, have been unnecessarily shaken in respect to 
the inspiration of the text in dispute ; and made unguard- 
ed concessions to its enemies. Their doubts and acknow- 
ledgments, have induced me once to suppose, that they 
must have possessed greater evidence of its spuriousness, 
than I have been able to find on a careful examination. I 
have never, however, met with any Trinitarians, who 
have avowed a fixed belief, that the text is an interpolation. 
Some appear to be inclined not to contend for it, for the 
three following reasons ; namely, the negative evidence 
which lies against it— the dispute about its divine author- 
ity — and its not being absolutely necessary to support the 
Trinitarian system. 

Although these things are true, yet, there is such inter- 
nal and external evidence of the divinity of the text, that 
no Trinitarian can be justified in declining to appear in its 
defence. Some, however, who take this course, are sound 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 55 

in the raith, pious and learned ; but " great men are not 
always wise." Many who are as eminent in every res- 
pect as the divines in view, are exactly of my opinion, in 
relation to the authenticity of the text in debate. 

Among these are, the Rev. William Jones, the Rev. 
George Travis, and Dr. Gill ; with many other shining 
lights in the Christian church. Dr. Emmons, and the 
Rev. John Brown, author of the Family Bible, have view- 
ed the evidence against the passage to be so trivial, that 
they have made no mention of the controversy, in writing 
on it. For a Trinitarian to express a single doubt, or to 
make the most distant approach to a concession that it is 
spurious, gives a greater blow to its authenticity, in the 
view of mankind, than all the arguments that can be set 
in array against it, by its avowed enemies. This should 
prevent every incautious observation from men, who firm- 
ly believe the doctrine of a Triune God. Believing that 
the text contains no false principle, it may be properly 
vindicated, as far as there is any testimony in its favor; 
and no concessions need be made of its spuriousness, unless 
there is positive evidence of the fact. As no Trinitarian 
appears to be prepared to say this, no steps should be taken, 
to expose any part of the professed word of God to the rage 
of its adversaries. Every saying of Trinitarians, which 
could be, w r ith any colour of plausibility, construed into an 
acknowledgment of the spuriousness of this text, has 
been eagerly seized by Anti-Trinitarians, as a ground, on 
which to raise their fabric of opposition to the doctrine of 
the Trinity. 

It appears to me that the Rev. Drs. Scott, Doddridge, and 
Wardlaw, have not been sufficiently guarded, in relation 

•to the sacred authority of this text ; as their thoughts ev- 
idently preponderated in favor of its authenticity. 

It has been asserted by a writer of the And- Trinitarian, 
school, and with an air of triumph, that "no gentleman. 



&6 THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

possessing a competent share of Biblical and critical 
knowledge, would now venture to call the text in question^, 
a genuine passage of scripture." I have a strong impres- 
sion, that such sayings as these, have a very imposing ef- 
fect on many of the advocates of divine truth. Some very 
able writers and divines, seem to have a dread of having 
their judgment and critical talents, called in question ; and 
this, they see will be done, if they attempt to use or vindi- 
cate 1 John, 5. 7, as a text of Scripture. In my opinion, 
therefore, this important passage suffers greatly, both from 
the neglect of its friends, and the opposition of its enemies. 
It w T ould be well if more caution were used by the Ortho- 
dox about it; and more exertion made on their part, to sup- 
port its credit ; seeing it bears such visible internal marks 
©f being inspired. 

If the text be in fact, a genuine passage, I must dissent 
from the opinion that it is unimportant, on the ground, that 
the doctrine of the Trinity can be supported independent 
of its aid. This seems like a reflection on Divine wisdom, 
in giving us superfluous evidence of an important truth ; 
and betrays a want of fidelity, in defending the Holy Or- 
acles, which God has committed to the care and use of his 
Church. 

But though this text, evidently, contains an important 
gospel doctrine, it ought to be rejected, if there wexe ple- 
nary and positive testimony against its authenticity. In a 
book, divinely inspired, there can be no deficiency, nor 
any thing redundant. Though the doctrine of the Trini- 
ty may be maintained without the text, yet, proving it to 
be an interpolation, may settle some wavering minds forever, 
on the side of Anti-Trinitarianism. I fear, that this thought 
may not have been sufficiently weighed by some Trinita- 
rian divines. Such an entering wedge, into the system of 
tiruth, may have a fatal influence, on the salvation of many 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 57 

souls. No doubt the Anti-Trinitarians are fully aware of 
this ; and are thereby excited to make every possible ef- 
fort to subvert the text in view. 

It is extremely unwise, therefore, to retreat before them 
from an inch of ground, that can be maintained by an in- 
genuous contest. Unless more evidence can be produced 
than I have yet seen, I must remain in the belief, that 
there is no need of surrendering 1 John 5. 7, into the 
hands of its enemies. It is too precious to be sacrificed in 
this manner. 

4. From what has been said on this subject, we may be 
convinced that the Trinity in Unity is a doctrine that rests 
on evidence as solid as the throne of God. 

The text that has been vindicated in these discourses, 
and many others, are incontestible proofs of its truth. 
There are, however, some general facts, clearly revealed 
in the Holy Scriptures, which more strongly prove the 
doctrine, than this text, or any other single passage. Ma- 
ny texts might, indeed, be selected, confirming the Trini- 
ty in the view of candid minds ; but artful reasoners will 
invent ways of evading their force. 1 John 5. 7 is the 
most conclusive proof of a Triune God of any one text in 
the Bible ; but it is construed by many in such a way as 
to impose silence on it, in respect to that doctrine. 

But, there are certain leading facts revealed in the Scrip- 
tures, whose force cannot be evaded, namely, that there 
are three agents, called " the Father, the Word, and the 
Holy Ghost;" whose names, perfections, works and wor- 
ship, prove the proper Deity of each, in connexion with 
the repeated declarations of the Bible, that there is only 
one God. On strict Unitarian principles, these facts form 
a paradox ; but on Trinitarian grounds, they are of easy 
explication. 

In relation to this subject, Anti-Trinitarians have no 
other alternative, but to argue, that the names, perfections, 
H 



53 THE AUTHENTICITY OP 

works and worship, ascribed to Christ and the Holy Spirit, 
are not proper evidences of their supreme divinity. But, 
this course is extremely arduous and difficult ; and their 
united labors evince, that they feel the pressure of these 
obstacles to their system. To explain away all the testi- 
mony which the Scriptures present, in relation to the Su- 
preme Deity of Christ and his atonement, the personality 
and divinity of the Holy Ghost, requires talents and exer- 
tion. It is surprising that they can satisfy their own minds 
on the subject, or convince their hearers of the practicabil- 
ity of supporting such a baseless scheme on the ground of 
Scripture testimony. But, after all their elaborate and 
subtile reasoning, we must believe an inspired apostle, 
when he says of Christ, " This is the true God, and eter- 
nal life." 1 John 5. 20. 

It will not be expected that I can enter, at present, into 
a discussion of the great facts, which have been briefly 
mentioned. Let it be remembered, however, that in va- 
rious sermons, these things have been amply supported 
from this desk. In three discourses from Rev. 1. 8, it 
was clearly shown, that Christ is eternal, almighty, om- 
niscient, omnipresent, the creator of all things, forgives sin, 
rules the universe, receives supreme ivorship, will ultimately 
raise the dead, misjudge accountable agents with a judg- 
ment from which there is no appeal. No higher evidence 
of his supreme Deity can be consistently required. To 
men in whose minds this point is established, no doubt 
can suggest itself concerning the personality and Deity of 
the Holy Ghost. As there can be no more than one God, 
these great facts prove, the Unity of three persons, agents 
or subsistences, in one undivided essence. The doctrine 
of the Trinity in Unity, therefore, is capable of being 
maintained, if 1 John 5. 7 should fall. But I think, we 
have great reason to believe that if St. John were now on 



I JOHN V. 7, VINDICATED. 59 

earth, he would freely declare that it was, either written 
with his own hand, or by his amanuensis. It has been 
fully shown, in what has been said, that the text rests on 
ample testimony. * x 

You, however, my hearers, must weigh the evidence 
that has been adduced in its favor for yourselves. Rut, 
remember, that you are accountable to God for the judg- 
ment you form on this important question. 

The Trinity of persons in one God, is a truth, on which, 
the whole plan of redemption is founded. If it is not 
true, then Christ is no more than a creature — no atone- 
ment has been made for sin — the Spirit is only a name of 
the Father — or one of his attributes, or modes of his ope- 
ration. The infinite evil of sin — the total depravity of the 
human heart — the necessity of regeneration by the Spirit 
■ — the eternal punishment of finally impenitent sinners, are 
points which must fall to the ground with that doctrine* 
We are warranted, therefore, in believing that Anti- Trin- 
itarian principles subvert the plan of salvation from the 
foundation to the top stone. If I know my own heart, I 
have no unkind feelings towards those people who are be- 
lievers in that doctrine ; but christian fidelity requires me 
to vindicate the truth, and oppose dangerous errors. 

The doctrine of the Trinity is not a matter of mere 
speculation. No ; it is of a highly practical nature. Re- 
ceiving or rejecting it, is an expression of moral character, 
and holds a connection with consequences of unlimited 
magnitude. The difference between Trinitarians and 
Anti-Trinitarians, as a certain writer states, " respects the 
object of worship — the ground of hope — and the rule of 
duty." Surely, these are momentous considerations. If 
I am not greatly deceived, however, I as ardently desire 
the salvation of my Anri-Trinitarian fellow creatures, as 
any other class of mankind. God grant, that any cause 



6© THE AUTHENTICITY OF 

of hardness, which they may give to me, on account of 
my opposition to their peculiar sentiments, may never alter 
my feelings towards them in that respect. 

It is our indispensable duty, christian brethren, ever to 
remember that divine saying, " Charity suffereth long, 
and is kind." It is perfectly consistent with stedfastness 
in the faith, and a persevering defence of ail its doctrines. 
" If any man have not the spirit of Christ he is none of his." 
Love to his glorious name will lead us to believe and de- 
fend his doctrines, to obey his commands, and to love our 
worst enemies. The Trinity in Unity, is laid down as an 
article of primary importance, in almost all the creeds 
in Christendom. In the defence of it, many fell a sac- 
rifice in the fifth century, when the dark cloud of Ari- 
anism, overspread the christian horizon. That doctrine 
has been correctly understood, firmly believed, ably 
defended, and adhered to by an overwhelming majority 
in the church in all ages ; with the exception of the greater 
part of the fourth and fifth centuries. Truth, however, is 
not always on the side of the multitude ; yet, it is no small 
degree of evidence in favor of the Trinity, that the Bible 
is so calculated, as to make a deep impression of it on al- 
most every mind. 

" Dr. Buchanan, in his tour through Hindostan, in the 
year 1806, found in the interior of that country, a body of 
Christians who have been settled there from the early ages 
of Christianity." They gave him this account of them- 
selves ; — " We are of the true faith, whatever you may be 
from the West, for we came from the place where the fol- 
lowers of Christ were first called Christians." The Dr. 
states, " At that time they had 55 churches, and their 
number was estimated at 23,000 souls." They informed 
him, that Christianity was first planted there by the apos- 



I J0HN V. 7, VINDICATED. 61 

tie Thomas. He says, in their system of faith, the article 
of the Trinity is thus expressed," — 

"We believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three 
persons in one God ; neither confounding the persons nor 
dividing the substance ; one in three, and three in one. 
None before or after the other : In majesty, honor, might 
and power, co-equal ; Unity in Trinity, and Trinity in 
Unity." See Dr. Buchanan's Christian Researches in 
Asia ; the sixth American edition, page 1 75. 

In this article of their belief, there is a remarkable coin- 
cidence with the faith of christians in general, of whom, it 
appears, they had no knowledge. This is a strong evi- 
dence, that the Trinity in Unity is the doctrine of Scrip- 
ture, and that they derived their faith in it from that foun- 
tain. 

5. In the view of this subject, we learn the importance 
of examining closely the ground of our faith and hope. 
" Every one of us shall give account of himself to God." 
We have no right to think, that any doctrine of the Bible 
is obscurely revealed. It is incumbent on us, therefore, to 
study the Scriptures with great care ; and in understand- 
ing them, admit their true meaning, without being influen- 
ced by any man or denomination of men. In this res- 
pect, we are taught by Jesus Christ to " call no man fa- 
ther upon earth ; for one is our Father, who is in heaven." 
Math 23. 3. The only rule of judging of doctrines, is the 
word of God ; and it is " able to make us wise unto sal- 
vation.". 2 Tim. 3. 15. In relation to this, our souls 
are at stake. It will appear at the day of judgment, that 
doctrinal errors were connected with the depravity of the 
heart — are of a moral nature, and render us accountable. 

If we abandon our belief in the Trinity, we can have no 
hope on the ground of Christ's atonement ; and, there- 



THE AUTHENTICITY, &C. 

fore, we must lean on a righteousness of our own for eter- 
nal justification. This is a broken reed — a basis of sand 
— a hope, of which we must eventually be ashamed. It 
is solemnly asserted by inspiration, " He that trusteth in 
his own heart is a fool." 

May God, therefore, through the riches of his grace in 
Jesus Christ, preserve us from all errors, and guide us in- 
to the truths of his Holy Word. Amen. 



[At the conclusion of the foregoing sermons, the Rev. John Sherman de- 
livered a discourse in answer to them, from the same pulpit; after which 
the following five sermons were preached, in reply to his.] 



For the? 



SERMON Y. 



I JOHN, V, 7. 

'or there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, 
the Word, and the Holy Ghost : and these three are 
one. 



In the sermons which have been delivered from these 
Words already, the subject was regularly closed. An event, 
however, has transpired, which renders it necessary for 
me to proceed with it beyond the original design. 

After the preceding discourses were preached, you 
know, my hearers, that an answer was given to them by 
a gentleman of respectable talents. It is, therefore, in- 
cumbent on me, either to give up the ground I have taken 
as untenable, or reply to his arguments. If I could view 
them as unanswerable, I hope, that my mind possesses the 
candor which would lead me to an open acknowledgment. 
It is truth and not victory, which should be our grand ob- 
ject in all our inquiries. 

The reasons of my dissent from the conclusions of that 
learned opponent, will give you an opportunity of judg- 
ing with more propriety the point in debate. 

I shall endeavor to meet his arguments in the order in 
which they occur ; and, assign the reasons why, they have 
not produced conviction in my mind. 

As the preamble of the gentleman's discourse is highly 
flattering to me in various respects, I shall pass over thg 



64 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

principal part of it in silence. In remarking on his ob- 
jections to 1 John 5. 7, it will be my aim to confirm his 
good opinion of my candor. 

As he professes to have an entire conviction of the spu- 
rionsness of that passage, I have no disposition to doubt 
his sincerity in the matter. My only concern will be with 
his arguments; as I differ with him in opinion, on the au- 
thenticity of the text in view. 

There are two things in the introduction of his dis- 
course, which require some attention. The first, is the 
opinion of Michaelis, who is called by the gentleman in 
opposition, " a Trinitarian of pre-eminent talents, and 
deeply versed in oriental learning." The words of that 
author, are said to be these ; that 1 John 5. 7, " holds its 
place in our printed Bibles, although well known by all 
the learned to be a vile interpolation, and in the face of 
the clearest and most indubitable evidence of its spurious- 
ness, to the shame and disgrace of the Christian world." 
To this, I reply : — If professor Michaelis be a Trinitarian, 
he has, certainly, expressed himself in relation to his breth- 
ren, in a bold and offensive manner. If the whole learned 
Trinitarian world, will retain a text, which they all know 
"to be a vile interpolation," it was surely high time for 
professor Michaelis, to have separated himself from such 
a corrupt connection. But, until sufficient evidence is pre- 
sented of the spuriousness of the text in question, we are 
under no obligation to coincide with Michaelis in opinion. 

We are directed by Christ in this respect, to " call no 
man our father upon the earth." Our Anti-Trinitarian 
friends,, are constantly warning us in the most solemn 
strains, to take heed how we subscribe to the creeds, con- 
fessions, catechisms, and assertions of men, who are not 
inspired of God. I can cheerfully join with my oppo- 
nent in his saying, " It is with truth only, that we are 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 65 

concerned; and, in it, we are all alike interested. The 
wood, hay, and stubble of error may prove more than 
a mere incumbrance — it may scorch us with its flames." 

The second thing to be noticed in the introduction of 
my opponent's discourse is, that the "learned European 
divines, in general, now acknowledge the spuriousness of 
the text in question." If in this assertion, the Orthodox 
be included, they have certainly altered greatly since 
the time in which Michaelis charged them with dishon- 
esty. But, allowing this to be true, we are not bound 
to be of their opinion until we are convinced by ample 
proof. But I must proceed from the introduction, to the 
body of the discourse on which I am animadverting. 

The gentleman commences, by informing us how ma- 
ny words of the place in question are disputed. His state- 
ment in this respect is, no doubt, correct. But, if it were 
otherwise, it would not affect the case ; as there are so 
many disputed, as completely to destroy the sense in 
which the Trinitarians understand the passage. 

His first attack is made on the internal evidence of 1 
John, 5. 7. In opposition to the plea of the Orthodox, 
that it is necessary to support a proper connection in the 
chapter, he contends, that it " bears, in this connection, 
the marks of forgery upon its very countenance." 

This is a heavy charge ; and, if it could be maintained 
it would be sufficient to destroy the whole authority of this 
text. But the forger is boldly attacked as well as the for- 
gery. The gentleman says, "the decree of heaven is for- 
ever against him." It seems, however, that he has gone 
down to the grave undetected, for his name cannot be 
told ; nor the place of his birth and residence ; nor the age 
in which he lived ; or whether he was a clergyman, or 
one of the laity. If such facts could be ascertained, the* 
would settle the dispute. 



SB OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

There are three great marks of forgery, mentioned by 
my opponent, which he expresses in the energetic language 
of " one absurdity — one contradiction — and one abomin- 
ation." 

In explaining, he observes, 1. " The absurdity is, that 
the six witnesses are reducible to five* Three and three 
make Jive only" But why, I ask, have not all the Trini- 
tarians on earth seen this pretended absurdity? Have they 
all been so blind, that they could not see it? or, so wicked 
as to overlook it? But, there is no difficulty in this case. 
It is not the intention of the writer of the text in debate 
to inform us that there are six distinct witnesses. It is sur- 
prising that this should be viewed as an argument calcu- 
lated to convince a Trinitarian. We believe, that the Holy 
Ghost is God, and that he can and does bear witness, both 
in heaven and on earth. As he fills immensity, the ob- 
jection can have no weight in our minds. In relation to 
this point the Psalmist saith unto God, "Whither shall I 
go from thy Spirit ? or whither shall I flee from thy pre- 
sence ? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there : if I 
make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there." 

It has been clearly proved, in my sermons on this sub- 
ject, that " the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost," 
do bear witness in, and from heaven, in respect to the 
scheme of salvation through Christ; and, that the Spirit 
also bears witness on earth, by his operations on men, 
cannot be doubted. The writer of the text has stated 
glorious facts; and, therefore, he is justly entitled to ex- 
honeration from the dreadful charge of " absurdity and 
contradiction" These two great marks of forgery are, 
I think, fully obviated. To make such objections is mere 
cavelling. 

* The third grand mark of forgery is, that the text con- 
tains " one abomination" This is a serious charge ! But 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 67 

on what is it founded? The gentleman goes on to tell ; 
namely, that by the words, " the Spirit of God is degraded 
to the rank of an earthly witness, in contradistinction from 
heavenly witnesses, and placed on a level with water and 
blood." He adds, " the force of the contrast, introduced 
by the words "in heaven and on earth," necessarily im- 
pels to the conclusion, that there are two sorts of witnesses ; 
the one celestial, and the other terrestrial The abom- 
ination is therefore obvious. The Spirit of God is de- 
graded to an earthly character, and made to be of earthly 
origin." This passage, he says, "bears the mark of the 
beast on its very forehead — changing the glory of the in- 
corruptible Spirit to that of a witne?* belonging + ~ ^h 
world." 

Surely this is high sounding language! P • v s 
there in all this, so degrading to the y 

opponent says, that he is made to be a .." 

The writer of the text, however, cor 
There is an obvious difference betw 
on earth, and being of an earthly or: 
This sense is forced upon the text by t . 3 

not its natural and obvious import. Th 
that there are three earthly witnesses : b are 

three that bear witness in or on earth svatei and 

blood," are divine ordinances ; and, therefore, it is no dis- 
honor to the Spirit to accompany his own institutions 
with the evidence of his special and saving operations. 
This is infinitely far from being "on a level" with these 
things. The statement of the writer, instead of being 
"an absurdity, a contradiction, and an abomination," is a 
lucid exhibition of the only way of eternal life. 

The judgment of Dr. Doddridge, is widely different 
from the opinion of my opponent in relation to this text; 
and, he is considered by Anti- Trinitarians themselves pre- 



g§ OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

eminent in candor, piety and learning. He says, " I am 
persuaded the words contain an important truth." See 
his "Family Expositor," vol. 6. page 311. It is really 
surprising, that so great and good a man as Dr. Doddridge, 
should speak so favorably of the meaning of the text, if 
the gentleman in opposition to me can with propriety ap- 
peal so solemnly "to every man's conscience and common 
sense," concerning its "absurdity, contradiction, and 
abomination." Can it be supposed, that Dr. Doddridge 
was destitute of conscience, and void of common sense? 
If this is true, it is time for our opponents to take back 
many things which they have said in honor of his mem- 
ory. - But, in the view of what has been said, I think, the 
t] tarks of forgery, which have been men- 

ti ed by i onent, disappear. The ground of my 

pect, must, however, abide your judg- 

ni€ ; ou are not responsible to me but to God. 

But ian in opposition, proceeds to another 

internal mar he spuriousness of the text in question, 

which i ximatical construction. He says, " the 

Gre anslated one, " is neuter gender, and 

cf b to the word <?£0 J or God, which is 

al ■ ; - >culine gender." But allowing this to 

be elusion which he draws from it, that it 

proves the passage to be a forgery, may, I think, be con- 
sistently denied. It may be thought to affect the received 
meaning of the text; but it can have no bearing against 
its authenticity; for, he himself acknowledges that, in 
respect to. harmony of design and action, it is grammati- 
cally accurate. He gives us an instance of this, from 1 
Cor. 3. 8. "He that planteth and he that watereth are 
owe." To argue the forgery of the text from this con- 
sideration is, therefore, inadmissible. 

The weight of the gentleman's argument appears to be 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 6$ 

this : The neuter gender cannot be applied to persons, for 
that would be such a confounding of genders, as to form 
a barbarism in language. The pronoun it is in the neu- 
ter gender, and yet it is frequently applied to persons, by 
writers of classical eminence ; as, for instance, " it was I, 
it was he, or it was they." Both the neuter and the mas- 
culine genders are applied to the Spirit, where the word 
evidently signifies God. See Rom. 8. 16. "The Spirit 
itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the 
children of God." John 16. 13. " When he, the Spirit 
of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth." Able 
scholars in the Greek language say, that the neuter gen- 
der, as applied to God in our text, instead of being a bar- 
barism, gives greater force and dignity to the sentence, 
than to have used the masculine gender. 

The gentleman's grammatical criticisms appear to have 
no effect in overthrowing the exposition of the text which 
was given in my first sermon ; nor in proving it to be a 
forgery. Some reasons have been offered, and more will 
be added. 

1 . The grammatical situation of the text, has not preven- 
ted the learned world, in general, from understanding it in 
the very sense in which it has been explained in the pre- 
ceding sermons. 2. The Holy Spirit, who inspired the 
sacred writers, is not bound to conform his words to hu- 
man views of grammatical rules. 3. The apostle, in John 
10. 30, uses the very same phraseology, in which the text 
in dispute is written, concerning the unity of persons in 
the Godhead ; namely, " I and my Father are one. 

But my opponent and his brethren in opinion say, that 
in the text referred to, " Christ speaks of the unity of 
agreement, or harmony in the same cause, between the 
Father and himself." This construction, however is far 
from being the real meaning of the sacred writer, as w« 



70 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 



may easily see by the connection. In that place our Lord 
is not speaking of unity of cause, or harmony of testimo- 
ny, as his main object ; but of similarity of nature, equal- 
ity in perfections, and unity in power. This will appear, 
on a careful examination of what is said, in connection 
with the words under consideration. The subject com- 
mences with the 23d verse. 

" And Jesus walked in the temple, in Solomon's porch. 
Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, 
How long dost thou make us to doubt ? If thou be the 
Christ, tell us plainly. Jesus answered them, I told you, 
and ye believed not : the works that I do in my Father's 
name, they bear witness of me. But ye believe not, be- 
cause ye are not my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep 
hear my voice and I know them, and they follow me, 
and I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never 
perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 
My Father which gave them to me, is greater than all : and 
no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." 

In the paragraph that has been cited, our Lord speaks 
of power, in distinction from other things — a power to give 
eternal life ; to preserve his people from every enemy, in- 
ternal and external ; and to preserve them forever. He 
asserts with a divine solemnity, " and they shall never pe- 
rish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand." 
No mere creature can, " give eternal life ;" for it " is the 
gift of God." Rom. 6. 23. A sacred writer says concer- 
ning the preservation of the saints, "Ye are kept by the 
power of God, through faith unto salvation." 1 Pet. 1. 5. 
But if Jesus Christ gives eternal life unto his people, and 
preserves them from final ruin — and no one can do these 
things but God ; it is an irresistible inference, that He is 
God. This shows his meaning clearly in the words, " I 
and my Father are one" In this, the Jews, certainly un- 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 71 

derstood him as claiming real divinity ; for as soon as th.v 
words had dropped from his lips, they " took up stones to 
stone him." This led him to say, " Many good works 
have I showed you from my Father : for which of these 
works do you stone me." The Jews answered for a good 
work we stone thee not ; but for blasphemy, and because 
that thou, being a man makest thyself God." Hence we 
see, that they understood his words in the very sense, in 
which we understand 1 John 5. 7. But instead of infor- 
ming them that they had mistaken his meaning, he persis- 
ted in his claims to divine honor ; saying, " I am the Son 
of God : — the Father is in me, and I in him." John 10. 
30, and 1 John 5. 7, are, therefore, perfectly similar, both 
in sense and phraseology. If the first be a genuine text, no 
evidence can arise from the words of the other as to gram- 
matical order, that it is a forgery. 

There is no intimation in the gospel, of St. John, that 
the Jews mistook Christ's meaning in respect to equality 
with God, either through prejudice, or any other cause. 
In the words in view, he undoubtedly, means, that Jesus 
is one with the Father, in a sense in which, no created be- 
ing can claim unity with God. This is, I think, a suffi- 
cient answer to the grammatical difficulty raised by my op- 
ponent against the text in dispute. 

4. If the supposed barbarism is such a powerful evi- 
dence that the text in question is an insertion, it is very 
strange that other Anti- Trinitarian writers have not availed 
themselves of the argument. It is the first time that I have 
ever seen it advanced in opposition to the text before us. 
The gentleman, whose objection I am answering is, I grant, 
a man of handsome talents, natural and acquired ; but 
thousands of consummate scholars on both sides of the 
question, must have seen the difficulty, if it is one ; and 3 
of course, attacks and defences on that ground, must have 



72 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

been numerous. Every hearer must see the force of this 
reply. I am not prepared to say, however, that my oppo- 
nent has originated the objection ; but no candid mind can 
allow it to have any weight. It is not my design to defend 
this, or any other part of our translation, only on the 
ground of fair reasoning. 

In my sermons on the text, I have explicitly acknow- 
ledged that its authenticy has been doubted, by some gen- 
tlemen of candor and intelligence, and have stated their 
reasons ; but I must weigh those reasons for myself and not 
abandon the passage, until I am convinced of its spurious- 
ness. It was to give you, my hearers, an opportunity of 
judging the merits of this debate, that my discourses on 
the text were delivered. We must give an account unto 
God for our conclusions on the subject ; and therefore, 
we must not be improperly swayed, either by the influence 
or assertions of men, who have no claim to infallibility. 

But I must not overlook any of the grounds which my 
opponent has taken. He proceeds, as if the case was clearly 
proved, saying, that some wicked Trinitarian has forged the 
text ; using these words, " this Trinitarian forger." He 
tells us also of his motivem this action ; " namely, to have in 
scripture one solitary passage at least, which might declare 
in plain language, the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity, or 
that the three are numerically distinct, yet one God only." 
He adds ; — " In every age the Trinitarians have been 
called on to produce at least one plain passage of Scripture, 
which like the orthodox creeds, asserts the doctrine of the 
Trinity in Unity, or of three persons in one God ; and 
they have appeared to great disadvantage in the eyes of 
their adversaries, that they have never been able to do it. 
Unquestionably, therefore, it must have been the design of 
the forger to wipe off this aspersion, and to introduce a 
plain proof text." 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 7g 

That the Trinitarians " have ;i Pi ieared to great disad- 
vantage in the eyes of their adversaries," may be true- 
but, that they have ever felt themselves to be greatly 
pressed on this ground, I am not prepared to admit. My 
own mind has never been embarrassed on that account- 
neither have I known of any other Trinitarians, sugo-esting 
the thing as a difficulty. It does not appear to have been 
the design of God, to have a system of doctrines comprised 
in any Single text, or to have them arranged in any part of 
the Scriptures, in the order of a creed. This demand 
of our opponents, we must consider as being captious and 
unreasonable. It may easily be retorted upon themselves 
by requiring them, '< to produce at least one plain passage 
of Scripture, asserting" their opinion that Christ is a mere 
man, and the natural son of Joseph and Mary. This is 
their creed, as really as the doctrine of the Trinity is 
our's :-but, if the truth of it could be made to appear from 
a combined view of the Scriptures, we would never think 
of calling upon them to produce a complete statement of 
it m a single passage to command our belief. If any far- 
ther reply be thought necessary, the enquirer is referred 
to the 4th inference of the fourth sermon ; which is, in 
my opinion, a complete answer to this formidable objection 
of my opponent. 

But I must now proceed in answering his subsequent 

(objections to the authority of the text in debate. 
He refers us to the memorable prayer of Christ, recor- 
ded m the 17th chap, of John, to convince us that the 
Greek word" £ v, one, signifies unity of harmony in the 
rame cause, instead of identity of essence. 
That this is the meaning of the expression, in the place 
which we are referred, there is no doubt. The nature 
the subject warrants this construction. We fully be- 
ieve that Christ is one with the Father « in the same 
K 



74 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

cause ;" and in that sense, men, through divine grace, may 
be one with them ; but, that is no proof that the Greek word 
EV is capable of no other signification. Particular modes 
of expression, are applied to different things in every lan- 
guage ; but the sense of them must be determined by the 
nature of the subjects to which they relate. If the Greek, 
word EV , be capable of no other import but "unity of har- 
mony ni the same cause," all the learned worldmust have 
always known it ; and, therefore, the text in question 
would never have been cited by any classical writers, as a 
proof of the Unity of the divine essence. With this an- 
swer, I shall consider my opponent's objection sufficient!/ 
removed. 

But the gentleman in opposition, after charging 
the supposed forger, with a barbarism in language, 
states ; — " The term,S V, is the most unfortunate, that he 
could have selected for his purpose. The declaration — 
These three are one, meaning one God, is something worse 
than wandering from his subject ; it is a deadly assault up- 
on the argument. What means this parade of a multitude 
of witnesses, but to establish more firmly the fact to which 
they testify ? grounded on several independent witnesses, 
who must of course be distinct and separate beings, or con- 
sciousnesses, in order to corroborate and confirm the testimo- 
ny of each other. Therefore, to s ty these three witnesses are 
one God, one being only, is striking away the corner stone of 
the argument, and demolishing at a stroke the foundation 
of the superstructure erected. Let me illustrate this case. 
Suppose I tell you that a certain fact was sworn to by a 
colonel, by a judge, and by a lawyer, three persons of dis- 
tinguished veracity. You say, at once, " In the mouth of 
two or three witnesses shall every word be established. 
I proceed then (to answer a purpose best known to my- 
self) to state, that these three are one man, one being, one 



OBJECTIONS ANSWFRE©. 75 

individual consciousness, who was colonel, judge, and law- 
yer at the same time, and whom I therefore, denominate 
three persons. Aye, say you ; — that alters the case ma- 
terially. Let us have more than one individual being, if 
you make out three witnesses. If your colonel, judge and 
lawyer be but one individual man you must have two more 
men, to make out three witnesses. 

" Thus, on every hand, the forger is detected, and the im- 
pious hot-headed zealot is slain with his own weapons. 
This interpolation throws every thing about it into absur- 
dity and confusion. Erase this from the Epistle, and the 
argument of St. John stands fair and consistent. In the 
Spirit, we have the witness of God by miraculous powers, 
testifying that he hath given us eternal life, through Jesus 
Christ his Son ; and in the ceremony of water baptism, 
in which men profess faith in his divine mission, and in the 
ceremony of the hordes supper, in which they commemo- 
rate his death in the ratification of the new covenant, that 
brings life and immortality to light, we have the witness of 
men, to the same fact. Hence the apostle pertinently re- 
marks, "If we receive the witness of men, the witness of 
God is greater." 

To all this, I answer :- — If we were Sabellians, and con- 
tending for the divine authority of the text in dispute, the gen- 
tleman's argument, could not by us be consistently resisted. 
The case of his " colonel, judge and lawyer, perfectly il- 
lustrates their views of a Trinity in God, but not our's." 
We do not consider the Almighty as being one, in the 
sense of a man sustaining three offices. In my sermons on 
this subject, it may be clearly seen, that there is an impor- 
tant sense, in which God is three distinct persons ; and, 
therefore, he is properly capable of bearing witness in a 
threefold manner. We do not hold, by any means, that 
the infinite Jehovah is only " ©ne individual consciousness.' 5 



76 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

My opponent must first convince us, that his view of the* 
manner of the divine existence is correct, before we can 
feel the force of this argument. If we were of his opin- 
ion about God, we would, no doubt, readily unite with 
him, in questioning the sacred authority of the text in de- 
bate. 

But it is our fixed belief, that there is as real a personal 
distinction in the Godhead, as there is in three men ; yet, 
an entire unity of essence. Such a unity of nature or es- 
sence, no created persons can consistently claim. It has 
been fully proved, that the three Divine Persons, who are 
mentioned in the text, do bear a distinct witness ; and 
that they are only one essence or being. The gentleman, 
therefore, has brought up a doctrine which we fully be- 
lieve, and placed it in a misrepresented light, to destroy the 
authority of a text that proves it. I should not have 
thought, that he would resort to such arguments, to con- 
vince Trinitarians, of the spuriousness of the text in ques- 
tion. But with these remarks, I shall dismiss the present 
objection. I cannot see how the " forger," as he is called, 
" is detected" yet ; nor how such weapons could slay him. 
Neither can I see how the text in view, "throws everj 
thing about it, into absurdity and confusion." 

You have seen, my hearers, that men of the first classi- 
cal eminence have thought otherwise. In my judgment, 
therefore, " the argument of St. John, stands" more " fair 
and consistent" with, than without this text. To your 
decision, however, the grounds of this conclusion are 
submitted. 

But that saying of my opponent claims some attention ; 
namely, " In the Spirit, we have the witness of God by mi- 
raculous powers, testifying that he hath given us eternal life, 
through Jesus Christ his Son." To me, his words seem 
to be involved in a great degree of ambiguity. I am at a 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 77 



loss to know, whether he means by the word " Spirit" the 
Father himself, or, only his operation. The gentleman's 
scheme, certainly forbids us to believe that he means by 
the Spirit, a Divine Person, distinct from the Father. 
If by the Spirit, he means merely a divine operation, 
then there can be no distinction between the Spirit and 
" miraculous powers :" but, if by the Spirit be meant the 
Father, then Jesus Christ is the Spirit's son ; and christians 
are baptized in the name of the Father, and in the name of 
the Son, and again in the name of the Father ; that is, twice 
in the name of God, and once in the name of a mere crea- 
ture. This is a great incumbrance to the Anti-Trinita- 
rian system ; and it makes them appear to as great a disad- 
vantage in our view, as we can possibly appear in their's 
by not producing a text, which they will acknowledge to 
express the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity. 

My opponent speaks of " water baptism," as a way " in 
which men profess faith in the divine mission" of Christ ; 
but, surely, this is as unscriptural language as the expres- 
sion Trinity in Unity. But the gentleman has probably 
adopted the phraseology, to escape saying, " in which men 
profess faith in his" blood. The latter, however, is cer- 
tainly the most Scriptural manner of expressing the ob- 
ject of a christian's faith. 

His observations on the Lord's supper, accord strictly 
with his views of baptism. The administration of these 
ceremonies, as he calls them, he considers as "the witness 
of men," in distinction from " miraculous powers," which 
he views as " the witness of God" But my learned 
antagonist, is certainly under a great mistake in this case ; 
for there is no human testimony mentioned by St. John, as 
bearing witness to the facts which he has mentioned. The 
Spirit is certainly not a human witness ; and neither are 
1 the water and the blood." The whole account is the 



78 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

witness of God, whether we include or exclude the text 
in debate, Those who wish to be farther satisfied on this 
point, are referred to Dr. Scott's exposition of the 9th verse, 
from which, undoubtedly, my opponent has formed this 
opinion. 

But in the view of my opponent's Greek arguments, I 
will mention an observation made on Anti- Trinitarian wri- 
ters, by Mr. Blaekwall, in his sacred classics, Part 2. 
Chap. 5. He says ; — " They outrage the sacred writers 
in a double capacity : Jlrst,'thej debase their sense as theo- 
logists and commentators, and then carp at, and vilify (heir 
language as grammarians and critics." That ingenious 
and pious divine, Dr. A. Fuller, says ; " They are obliged, 
on almost every occasion, to have recourse to interpolation , 
or mistranslation; and are driven to disown the apostolic 
reasonings as a proper test of religious sentiment." He 
adds " When they have mangled and altered the translation 
to their own minds ; informing us, that a term may be ren- 
dered so — and such a passage should be pointed so — and 
so on — they seem to expect that their opponents shall 
quote the Scriptures accordingly; and, if they do not, are 
very liberal in insinuating, that their design is to impose 
upon the vulgar. But, though it be admitted, that every 
translation must needs have its imperfections, and that 
these imperfections ought to be corrected by fair and im- 
partial criticism ; yet, where alterations are made by those 
who have an end to answer by them, they ought always 
to be suspected, and will be so by thinking and impartial 
people." See Fuller's Letters, page 252. 

But, on the internal character of 1 John 5. 7, my oppo- 
nent observes, — " that the manuscripts, versions, and quo- 
tations of this passage vary very much in their language — j 
some of them omitting the word Holy before Spirit — -I 
some quotations having it " these three are one God," which I 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 79 

is the reading of no manuscript or version whatever — and 
some manuscrips and versions have it " these three agree in 
one." _Some omit the last clause of verse 8th and attach it 
to verse 7th, which is the case with Cardinal Zimminies's 
complutension polyclot, on which so much dependence is 
placed by the advocates for the genuineness of the passage. 
Now this diversity, in so singular a passage, ingenders a 
strong presumption, that it has been tampered with, by 
more hands than one; and, that different forgers, have been 
at variance with respect to the best method of wording the 
interpolation. Had it been written by St. John, as we 
have it in our Bibles, it would have been in every man's 
memory and mouth; and quotations, versions and manu- 
scripts, would have been as much one, as the heavenly wit- 
nesses are said to be." 

To this, I reply ;— If different manuscripts and versions, 
disagree in reading, in respect to this text, then, something 
of it is to be found in them. The gentleman in opposition, 
has more than insinuated, that almost all the ancient man- 
uscripts and versions of Scripture, are without any thing 
of the text in dispute. He says, however, the word " Ho- 
ly," is omitted in " some of them" before " Spirit ;" and, 
therefore, in such manuscripts and versions the text is entire, 
with the exception of one word. In others, he says, "we 
have it," " these three agree in one :" and, therefore, in 
them, the text is entire, with the exception of the word in, 
and the addition of two letters, making are to be the word 
agree. He acknowledges likewise, that the greater part of 
the text is to be found in the complutension polyclot of 
Cardinal Zimmenies. In that my opponent says, "the lat- 
ter clause of verse 8th, is omitted, and attached to the 7th 
verse : and, therefore, the text in dispute reads, " there are 
three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, 
and the- Holy Ghost; and these three agree in oneP 



80 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED, 

This is an omission of the word for, and the addition 
of two letters, making the word are, to be agree. 

In respect to some quotations of the ancient fathers, my 
opponent complains, that they have added to the verse in 
debate, the word God. " These three are one God" 
In quoting, many writers aim to give the sense of a text, 
without confining themselves to its words ;-— and, there*- 
fore, such quotations are a powerful evidence of the au- 
thenticity of the passage in question. 

My opponent's conclusion, " that it has been tampered 
with by more hands than one," is, probably true; for, it 
has been as much the interest of Anti-Trinitarians to anni- 
hilate its existence, or obscure its sense ; as it has been the 
interest of the Orthodox to preserve its being, or defend its 
proper import. Granting it to be a genuine passage, it 
must have been a very " speckled bird" during the reign 
of Arianism, which was, with very little variation, from 
the early part of the fourth century to the middle of the 
sixth. 

The gentleman's last remark, that " had it been written 
by St. John, — quotations, versions and manuscripts would 
have been as much one as the heavenly witnesses are said 
to be," is very far from being conclusive. There are va- 
rious readings of texts in the different versions of Scrip- 
ture, which stand undisputed in respect to authenticity. 
We find quotations from the Old Testament in the New, 
differing as much in words, as the text in dispute. These 
quotations are from the Septuagint translation, which wag 
made some hundred years before the birth of Christ. 
Gen. 5. 24, reads in our translation, "And Enoch walked 
with God;" but, as it is taken from the Septuagint, in Heb. 
11. 5, it is rendered, " he pleased God." In that transla- 
tion, it is said of Christ, — Heb. 1. 6, " Let all the angels 
of God worship him :" but our translation of the 97th Psalm, 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 81 

9th verse, is, " Worship him all ye gods." The authenti- 
city of these passages, is not called in question on ac- 
count of such variations. 

When we take into view the state of the christian world 
in the Arian age, and the nature of the text in dispute, we 
need not wonder at finding it involved in some degree of 
obscurity. The gentleman's arguments are far from de- 
stroying the internal evidence of 1 John 5. 7, as a genu- 
ine text of Scripture ; and his historical testimony against 
its authority, shall be carefully considered in the next dis- 
course . 

L 



SERMON VI. 



I JOHN, V, 7. 

For there are three that hear record in heaven, the Father^ 
the Word, and the Holy Ghost : and these three are 
one. 



I have an opportunity, my hearers, of proceeding with 
my reply to the discourse which was delivered in this house 
in opposition to my sermons on this text. At our last 
meeting, an answer was given to the arguments of my op- 
ponent, on the internal evidence of its spuriousness. 

It must be acknowledged, that much depends on the in- 
ternal character of the passage in djspute. If it could be 
proved that it is in itself an absurdity, or, that it contains 
a doctrine at variance with the established principles of the 
Scriptures; no historical testimony against it would be 
necessary to silence its voice. On the contrary, if no 
solid argument appears against it in these respects, power- 
ful historical evidence must be required, to condemn it as 
a spurious text in the view of impartial people. I must 
be allowed to think, that there is a conviction in your 
minds, that the purity of its internal character has been 
amply supported, in opp* virion to all the objections of my 
ingenious and ardent opponent. 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 83 

Under this impression, I shall proceed to an examina- 
tion of his historical testimony against the divine authority 
of the text in debate. The gentleman seems to proceed 
with admirable courage and alacrity in laying that before 
us. He goes on to say ; — 

" In proving the spuriousness of this passage, it falls to 
our lot to show, that it could not have been in the auto- 
graph of St. John — i. e. to prove a negative. Much is 
said, by the advocates of this passage, to degrade what is 
styled negative evidence. But it is the only evidence by 
which any notorious and universally admitted interpola- 
tion can be proved to be such; and is often as convincing, 
as satisfactory and certain, as any positive proof whatever. 
The absence of a person from the place where he must be, 
if alive, is absolute proof of his death ; and to show and 
to prove a negative in the case, viz. that he is not in that 
place, is as substantial and irresistible evidence, as it would 
be to exhibit his lifeless body in the tomb." 

It appears to be the leading object of my opponent, in 
what has now been stated, to convince us, that negative 
proof is sufficient to silence the text in question. If this 
kind of evidence were opposed by no positive proof to the 
contrary, it is readily granted that it would be sufficient. If, 
when Erasmus, in the fifteenth century, called the authen- 
ticity of the text in question, no account could be found 
of it in any manuscript, or version of the Scriptures ; nor 
any quotations of it hi the writings of the ancient fathers 
of the Christian church ; the evidence would be irresist- 
ible, that it must have been forged near that very time. 
But in the historical evidence which was advanced in my 
third sermon, we have seen that in every century, back to 
the very first in the Christian era, it has been considered 
as an inspired passage. But if it could be proved that there 
was no possibility of erasing it from the ancient manu- 



84 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

scripts, versions and writings of the fathers ; nor, of omit- 
ting it by transcribers, neither through design nor inadver- 
tence ; but, that forging and inserting it in such writings 
were practicable and easy, then we must conclude, that, as 
it does not appear in all these places, it must be an interpo- 
lation. So, my opponent reasons on the subject ; but it 
is a kind of logic, that I cannot admit as being sound. 

He has expressly admitted that it was quoted seven hun- 
dred years by the Latin authors, and two hundred years 
by the Greek writers, before it was questioned by Eras- 
mus as being a spurious text. He says, " the passage of 
the heavenly witnesses is not quoted by any Greek wri- 
ter before the thirteenth century, nor by any Latin wri- 
ter earlier than the eighth." It is, however, very surpri- 
sing, that a notorious and now universally admitted inter- 
polation, should have been quoted in the christian world 
through a period of seven hundred years, without one 
faithful witness to oppose the iniquity ! 

In the eighth century, the art of printing was unknown ; 
and therefore, all the copies of the scriptures then exist- 
ing were written with the pen. Surely, no writers would 
have quoted the text in debate, unless they found it in 
some of the sacred manuscripts. Without any doubt, 
there were many manuscripts of scripture existing then 
far more ancient than any that are now in being. As my 
opponent allows, that the text was then quoted by the La- 
tin writers, it is a strong evidence of its authenticity. 

But if it should be said, that the text must have been 
forged in the eigth century, and that there were no Anti- 
Trinitarians between that and the fifteenth, to announce 
the forgery to the world ; we may reply, that such people 
have, no doubt, existed in every age. We have an ac- 
count of a famous Italian father, called Joachim, who was 
tried for Arian sentiments in the beginning of the thir 



OBJECTIONS ANSWEREB. 35 

teenth century; and 1 John 5. 7, was exhibited against 
him, in a general council, of 1200 ministers, "and an 
equal number of deputies." See page 45. 

It may be asked, why did not that learned man inform 
his judges, that the text on which their main reliance wa* 
placed, was "a vile interpolation," and never taken from 
the autograph of St. John? This ground would, un- 
doubtedly, have been taken by him, if he had thought 
himself able to maintain it, before that extensive and 
learned body. This we see he did not attempt. 

If that kind of evidence, contended for by my oppo- 
nent, were complete, I have no special objection to its ad- 
mission. But that is not the fact. That this text, has 
been "absent from every place, where it must be if alive , 
from the fifteenth century, up to the first, has never been 
proved ; but the reverse has been amply supported. 

After stating and illustrating the potver of negative evi- 
dence, the gentleman goes on to observe : — " The true 
state of the case is this : If the passage was actually writ- 
ten by St. John, it would undoubtedly be found in the 
best and most ancient Greek manuscripts ; that we should 
certainly find it in the great majority of them ; that it 
would appear in the different translations made near the 
days of the Apostles ; that it should be quoted by the 
fathers in their controversies with the Anti- Trinitarians, 
and must certainly be found in their works, particularly 
in the writings of Athanasius, who was the great champion 
of the Trinitarian cause in the early part of the fourth 
century." My opponent goes on to say, " The burden 
of proof, the laboring oar, belongs wholly to those who 
would impose a passage as genuine, the word of a sacred 
penman; and it must be proved by positive evidence, 
competent evidence, sufficient evidence ; such evidence as 
reaches back, in its testimony, to the Apostolic age. 



S6 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 



This is particularly necessary in the case of a contested 
passage, and still more so of so singular a passage ; one 
pertaining to a vastly interesting subject, which has been 
the grand theme of violent dispute from the very early 
ages of the church to the present period." 

The above statement is an abridgment of nearly three 
pages of my opponent's discourse. In condensing, how- 
ever, I have taken great care to preserve the strength of 
his arguments ; to which I shall now reply. His first 
position is, " If this passage was actually written by St. 
John, it would undoubtedly be found in the best and most 
ancient Greek manuscripts." 

What he would consider as the best Greek manuscripts, 
I cannot tell ; unless he means such ones as have the 
least in them relating to the Trinity, and its kindred doc- 
trines. I am very willing to admit, that the age of ma- 
nuscripts is of great importance. But, to meet the point, 
I would observe, the gentleman's argument appears to be 
this : If 1 John v. 7, were a genuine text, " it would be 
found in the most ancient Greek manuscripts." Th© 
Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts are the most an- 
cient ; the text in dispute is not found in them ; therefore, 
it is spurious. If the most ancient manuscripts included 
the autograph of St. John, his argument would be invin- 
cible. That, however, with many others which have 
been transcribed from it, are lost in the revolution of time. 
The Alexandrian manuscript, which is written in the 
Greek character, is allowed to be the oldest in the world ; 
but Wetstein admits that it is of no higher antiquity than 
the close of the 5th century. He has given great attention 
to the subject ; and as that manuscript does not contain 
the text in debate, he, being an Anti-Trinitarian, would 
readily allow it all the credit it .could derive from age or 
any other circumstance. But, as the want of the text in 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 87 

question in this arid the Vatican manuscript, was ac- 
knowledged in my sermons, and accounted for, the reader 
is referred to my arguments. I must dissent from the 
conclusion of my opponent, that " if the passage was ac- 
tually written by St. John, it would be found in the best 
and most ancient Greek manuscripts." Every candid 
mind must be convinced that the case may be otherwise. 
My opponent's next position is, that " if the passage be 
genuine," we should certainly find it in the great majority 
of the ancient Greek manuscripts. 

I will only say, at present, to this argument, that if a 
sufficient reason can be assigned for the want of the text 
in some of the ancient manuscripts, it will also account, in 
a great measure, for the want of it " in the great majority 
of them." I might reply more largely ; but I shall be 
under the necessity of using the same arguments in an- 
swering my opponent hereafter. 

His next position is : " If the passage was actually 
written by St. John, it would appear in the different trans- 
lations made near the days of the Apostles." 

To this I answer : As the art of printing was not un- 
derstood in the early ages, and all depended on the pen, 
the translations themselves were in manuscript ; and, 
therefore, they were liable to the same erasures and omis- 
sions as the Greek manuscripts. 

In relation to printing, my opponent says, " which noble 
art, blessed be God, secures the church, through all £&f 
ture ages, from the imposition of forgery." 

In all his statements, he goes evidently on the ground 
that forgery was a very easy thing ; but that erasures and 
omissions were impracticable. By such a method of rea- 
soning, three things are effected ; namely, he exculpates 
the Arians, criminates the Orthodox, and destroys a text? 
whose very sound deprives him of patience, and calls fortk 



88 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

all the powers of his mind in anathemas against it. I 
think, however, that this " noble art," as he elegantly 
calls printing, is as necessary to " secure the Church, 
through all future ages, from the imposition" of erasing 
and omitting, as from forgery and insertion. 

My opponent's next position is : " If the passage was 
actually written by St. John, it would have been quoted 
by the fathers in their controversies with the Anti- Tri- 
nitarians ; and must certainly be found in their works, 
particularly in the writings of Athanasius." 

I reply : This, no doubt, is to be expected. Their wri- 
tings, however, might have been mutilated, as well as the 
Sacred Oracles, by the same hands, and for the same rea- 
sons. But history testifies, that in this respect, we have the 
evidence which the gentleman requires. In proof of this, 
the reader is referred to the third sermon, page 42 — 48. 
We have, therefore, as great evidence that the text in dis- 
pute was quoted by the ancient fathers, as can be expected 
at this distance of time. 

But the gentleman proceeds in saying, " The burden of 
proof, the laboring oar, belongs wholly to those who would 
impose" this text on mankind, as a sacred passage. 

Surely, we have no right to object against laboring in 
defence of the inspired writings. I would neither receive 
the text myself, nor recommend a belief of its authenticity 
to others, without a conviction that it bears the indubitable 
marks of divine authority. 

But my opponent says, with an air of triumph, that the 
text in view " must be substantiated, proved, and rendered 
certainly genuine, by positive evidence, competent evidence, 
ancient evidence, sufficient evidence, such evidence as 
reaches back in its testimony to the period of the Apostolic 
age, and is attended with such corroborating considerations, 
as to recommend it to the impartial mincl." He adds. 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED, 89 

c< This is particularly necessary in the case of a contested 
passage ; and still more so, of so singular a passage as the 
one now in question." 

My reply to this high-sounding argument, is : In the 
historical evidence which was adduced in my 3d sermon, 
we have ancient evidence, and, I think, sufficient 'evidence,. 
to convince men whose minds are not hostile to Trinitarian 
doctrines. 

But the gentleman gives us two grand reasons for re- 
quiring such a host of evidence to prove the authority of 
the text in debate. The first is, " it is a contested passage ,*" 
and the second, " it is & singular passage " To his first 
appalling argument, I^say, if being " contested" is a suffi- 
cient reason to look on the teit with a jealous eye, the 
whole Bible is in the very same situation. Volumes have 
been written to prove that the Scriptures at large are an 
imposition on mankind ; and by men who have gloried in 
their philosophical talents, extensive erudition, indepen- 
dence of mind, and deep research. If my opponent's ar- 
gument is allowed to have any weight, we must stand in 
doubt of every part of that which we call the word of God. 
His second reason against the authority of the text, is its 
being " so singular a passage" If all the difficulties 
which are charged upon it by the gentleman, were real 
ones, it is surely a " singular passage." But, I must say, 
with the celebrated Dr. Doddridge, "I am persuaded that 
the words contain an important truth ;" a truth expressed 
in a decent and intelligible manner, whether they are spu- 
rious or genuine. I cannot discover in them, by the help 
of all that has been said, " absurdity, contradiction, abo- 
mination," or V barbarism." The text certainly expresses, 
with great clearness, a plain Bible doctrine ; as has been 
largely proved in my sermons on it. On these two reasons, 
I think nothing more need be said, 
M 



90 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

The gentleman, however, proceeds in saying, that the 
text in question, " pertaining to a vastly interesting sub- 
ject, which has been a grand theme of violent dispute, from 
the very early ages of the Church to the present period,' 5 
is not to " be received as genuine," unless it be " substan- 
tiated" in the manner which he has stated. 

To this, my reply is : The great majority of the Church, 
clergy and laity, in all ages, have never thought of ques- 
tioning the sacred authority of the text. My opponent 
speaks of it as having " been a theme of violent dispute in 
all ages." But, that its advocates have treated their anta- 
gonists with violence, remains to be proved. They may 
have suffered on this account, by the hands of the Roman 
Church ; but for that, we deny any responsibility. If the 
Papal Hierarchy are called Trinitarians, we ought not 
to be charged with their doings ; seeing there is no 
connection between us in religious matters. They 
have persecuted us, to a far greater degree than they have 
the Anti- Trinitarians. There has, however, been great 
violence used in this case, as I have largely proved in my 
third sermon on the text. I still think, that those men 
who treated evangelical Trinitarians as I have mentioned, 
were as likely to have been guilty of erasing and. omitting 
it, as their opponents were of its forgery and insertion. 
It has been shown that Dr. Scott was fully of this opinion ; 
and he was once an Anti-Trinitarian. See the 3d sermon, 
page 38. To use the words of my opponent, I am surely, 
in this opinion, " ranking with one of the wisest and wor- 
thiest of men." But I shall now pass by some of his ob- 
servations, as they have in effect been already answered. 

The next thing in his discourse which I feel bound to 
notice, is : " The doctrine of the Trinity, whether founded 
in the Scripture or not,- was advocated by some in the se- 
cond, and very generally by the Bishops in the third cen- 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 



91 



lury, though not without violent opposition from the com- 
mon people, as is confessed by Tertullian, Basil, and 
others. It was finally established, by a general council, 
in the early part of the fourth century, and became the 
reigning creed of Christendom. At this time lived Arius, 
who called it in question with great zeal. It became a violent 
subject of controversy throughout the whole Christian 
world. Anathemas w r ere poured upon the head of Arius 
and his followers, by the Orthodox ; and though Arius 
was restored to good standing in the Church, by an em- 
peror who favored his cause, yet he soon came to a tragical 
end, probably by poison." 

As I view the above statement to be very incorrect, and 
interlarded with some painful and unsupported insinua- 
tions, a very particular answer is deemed necessary. It is 
more than insinuated by the gentleman in opposition, that 
" the Trinitarian doctrine" was but little known in the 
Christian world, until some time in the second century ; 
and then advocated only by " some" But according to 
approved ecclesiastical historians, the Church was ortho- 
dox, from the very days of the Apostles, for three whole cen- 
turies. The exception from this statement, was very small 
indeed. In respect to the Church through the whole of 
the first century, Milner says : " The divinity of Christ, 
the atonement, justification by faith, regeneration by the 
Holy Ghost, and election, were doctrines of the primitive 
Church ; in view and belief of which, the grace of God 
was so richly and gloriously displayed in the conversion of 
many souls." T. Abr. page 58. He says likewise, in 
page 86: "It appears, that a denial of the divinity of 
Christ could not find a person that was suffered to remain 
in the Church, in the course of 200 years. Every Chris- 
tian, of any eminence for judgment and piety, unequivo- 
cally held an opposite language." Concerning Irenaeus, 



92 ©EJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

who died in the beginning of the third century, Milner 
says : " He agrees with all the primitive Christians in the 
doctrine of the Trinity, and makes use of the 45th Psalm 
to prove the Deity of Christ." Page 89. The complexion 
of religious sentiment in the third century, may be seen by 
what this historian says of the Novatians; that they 
" separated themselves from the general Church, not on 
the ground of doctrine, but of discipline." Page 118. 

My opponent acknowledges, that " the doctrine of the 
Trinity was very generally advocated by the Bishops in 
the third century ;" but, with " violent opposition from the 
common people" I cannot tell from what source the gen- 
tleman received his information on this subject : nor is it 
very material, as its accuracy is distinctly denied. 

With respect to " the common people," permit me to 
remark, that unless they were members of the Christian 
churches, their opinion has nothing to do in this case. 
The Roman Empire, in the third century, was under 
heathen government; and, therefore, we may be well 
assured that they were all opposed to the doctrine in view, 
from the Emperor on the throne, down to the peasant in 
his cottage. " The Bishops," no doubt, were opposed by 
such " common people," as well as by those of distin- 
guished rank in point of science, property, and power. 
But, if by "the common people," be meant those who 
professed the Christian religion, I reply, they would not 
have been admitted into the Church at that time, without 
r an express declaration of their faith in the Trinitarian 
doctrine. There could have been no disagreement, there- 
fore, between them and their Bishops on that subject. 
We may learn the views of common Christians in that 
period, from their own words, and in their dying moments. 
Thousands were slain by the Roman government, for 
holding to the doctrine of the Trinity ; " common people," 
as well as the Bishops. 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 9o 

Sabina lived in the third century ; and surely she was 
not a Bishop ; yet she fully believed in a Triune 1 God. 
When she was arraigned at the bar of Polemon, for being 
a Christian, that heathen magistrate asked her, " What 
God dost thou adore ?" In that awful situation, she re- 
plied, " God Almighty, who made all things, of which we 
are assured by his Word Jesus Christ." — " And what dost 
thou adore ?" said he to Asclepiades ; who readily replied, 
"Jesus Christ." "What! is there another God ?" " No,"; 
said this Christian, " this is the same which we came here 
to confess." Milner says, " He who worships the Trinity 
in Unity, will find no difficulty in reconciling these two 
confessions." 

When Lepidus, another Roman officer, asked Pionius, 
" What God do you adore ?" he answered, " Him that 
made heaven and earth." The Judge proceeded, " You 
mean him that was crucified ?" To this the martyr said, 
"I mean Him whom God the Father hath sent for the 
salvation of men." It appears very clearly from these 
statements, that the Christians were then perfectly united 
in respect to the Trinity in Unity, the Deity of Christ, 
and his atonement. 

If, however, " by the common people" my opponent 
means, the disciples of Cerinthus, Mercion, &c. his re- 
marks may be very true. But, the real church, had no 
more connection with them, than she had with the sur- 
rounding heathen. In respect to the Orthodox, Milner 
says, " They were all one body, of one name, and cordially 
loved one another as brethren. There were, indeed, many 
heretics ; but real Christians did not admit them into their 
communities. The line of distinction was drawn with 
precision, and a dislike to the person and offices of Christ, 
tnd of the real spirit of holiness, discriminated the here- 
tics : and separation from them, wlixle it was the best mark 



94 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

of benevolence to their souls, preserved the faith and love 
of the true Christians in genuine purity." Abr. p. 63. 

As those ancient heretics, were not embodied with the 
Orthodox in the same church, neither were they exposed 
to death with the multitude of true believers, who were 

slain in the ten heathen persecutions. The historian says 
of them, " It does not appear from any evidence which I 
can find, that these men were ever persecuted for their 
religion. Their doctrine pleased the carnal heart too well 
to excite a spirit of persecution. They spake of the world, 
and the world heard them." Abr. p. 58. 

The gentleman in opposition, after hinting at the silence 
of Scripture on the doctrine of the Trinity — the little 
knowledge the christian world had of it through the first 
and second centuries—- the opposition that was made to it 
by " the common people" in the third century, says, " It 
was finally established, by a general council in the early 
part of the fourth century, and became the reigning creed 
of Christendom." 

He refers, undoubtedly, to the famous council of Nice. 
It commenced in the twenty-fifth year of that century, by 
the special order of Constantine the Great; and the ob- 
ject of it was, to effect a settlement of the grand dispute, 
between the Arians and the Orthodox. That celebrated 
council, consisted of three hundred and eighteen Bishops, 
who were assembled from all parts of the christian world. 
After their decision on the case at issue, the famous Arius, 
" was deposed from the ministry, and excommunicated 
from the church. Twenty-two ministers, out of three 
hundred and eighteen, only adhered to his cause. At this 
council, was formed the Nicene creed, sound in itself, but 
hated by Anti-Trinitarians then, and in every subsequent 
period of time. Many, who composed that council, had 
lived to see a considerable part of the third century, and 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 95 

had endured unparalleled sufferings for Christ, in the hea- 
then persecutions. They were acquainted with the Holy 
Scriptures, and with the views of the church respecting 
the Trinity, from then, up to the apostles. In a long se- 
ries of persecutions, they had evinced the sincerity of 
their love to God, and attachment to his truth." 

The historian says, " Apostolical discernment and piety, 
in no inconsiderable degree, animated the spirit of the 
Nicene fathers. Not a few of them bore on their bodies 
" the marks of the Lord Jesus." One, debilitated by the 
application of hot iron to both his hands ; some deprived 
of both their eyes: others, of their legs. A croud of 
martyrs collected in one body." Abr. p. 172 

We have no reason to suppose, in the view of this ac- 
count, that they came together to impose a new doctrine 
on the christian church ; but, to vindicate "the faith which 
was once delivered to the saints," and to cut off her he- 
retical members. Duty required these steps to be taken. 

But my opponent says — " Anathemas were poured upon 
the head of Arms and his followers, by the Orthodox." 
The expression " anathemas" is very strong indeed ; 
but, it amounts to no more than excommunication from 
the communion of sound Christians. The church is com- 
manded to do this in these words, which are of divine au- 
thority : — " A man that is an heretic, after the first and 
second admonition reject; knowing that such an one is 
subverted ; being condemned of himself." 

Concerning Arius, the gentleman adds ; " though he 
was restored to good standing in the church, by an empe- 
ror who favored his cause; yet, he came to a tragical 
end — probably by poison." Constantine was this emperor. 
He was fond of peace and union in the church, to a fault ; 
but, he was strictly orthodox in his own sentiments. He 
was not so fully aware of the duplicity of Arius, as the 



96 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

♦Bishops were ; and, therefore, he was more easily impo- 
sed upon by that artful heretic. There was some fear in 
the mind of Constantine, that the orthodox clergy, were 
prejudiced against him, on other grounds than doctrine. 
It was the man, and not his heresy, which the emperor 
favored. 

Milner says " Constantine himself, was not to be pre- 
vailed on to admit Arius into the church, unless he were 
convinced of his orthodoxy. He sent for him to the pa- 
lace, and asked him plainly, whether he agreed to the Ni- 
cene decrees. Arius, without hesitation, subscribed : the 
emperor ordered him to swear : he assented to this also. 
Constantine, whose scruples were now overcome, ordered 
the Bishop to receive him into the church the next day." 
The Allans then began to rejoice, and the church to 
weep. Both parties knew very well, that although Arius 
had subscribed to the Nicene creed, his principles remained 
the same. The Bishop, spent the time in solemn fasting 
and prayer, for divine interposition in that affecting case. 
; ' The next day," says Milner, " seemed to be a triumphant 
one to the Arians : the heads of the party paraded through 
the city with Arius in the midst. When they came nigh to 
the forum of Constantine, a sudden terror, with a disor- 
der of the bowels, seized Arius. He retired, and then 
fainted ; and his bowels were poured out with a vast effu- 
sion of blood." "Thus," says the historian, " God sent 
deliverance, and confounded the adversaries of Zion." 

This, is what my opponent calls " a tragical end — pro- 
bably destroyed by poison." But the word, "probably '," 
is all the evidence of the thing, that he has produced. To 
fasten such a charge upon the Orthodox, something of 
the testimony is necessary, which he demands to prove the 
authority of the text in dispute. 

After the death of Arius, my opponent says,—" His 
doctrine, however gained ground with astonishing rapidity 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 97 

under the reign of two emperors, and seemed for a season, 
to bid fair to become the dominant religion, especially in the 
East, where it prevailed far more generally than in the 
West. At length, Trinitarianism gained a complete victo- 
ry, and the cause of Arius was suddenly extinguished, 
Trinitarianism became the order of the day, from the 
reign of Justinian, down through all the dark ages, until 
the time of the reformation." 

On what the gentleman has now said, a few brief re- 
marks may be made. It is very true, that Arianism spread 
its baleful wings over the christian world, almost entirely; 
and, with a rapidity that was mournful, as well as " as- 
tonishing." My opponent says- — " It seemed for a season? 
to bid fair to become the dominant religion." The Arians, 
no doubt, then anticipated an everlasting triumph of their 
deleterious cause. But, it was only " for a season" that this 
smoke of the pit, darkened the christian horizon. The 
gentleman's expression " a season" is very indefinite. Its 
duration, however was, above one half of the fourth cen- 
tury, the whole of the fifth, and more than half of the 
sixth century; according to his own calculation; for, the 
emperor Justinian, died in the year 566. This season, 
therefore, was more than two hundred years* 

It seems to be the object of my opponent, in calling the 
reign of Arianism " a season," to impress the mind with such 
a view of its shortness, that no advantage could have been 
taken, of erasing the text in debate, from the manuscripts 
and versions of Scripture then in use, nor in forming oth- 
ers, in which it might have been omitted. He appears 
to keep his eye on this point, as a thing of the first im- 
portance to his cause. But, immediately after the Nicen* 
council, which was in the 25th year of the fourth century^ 
Arianism prevailed to such a degree in the Roman em- 
pire, that Athanasius, who is called "the champion of Or 
N 



28 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

jhodoxy," was banished. The Nicene creed, therefore, 
with the men, and those: parts of Scripture which suppor- 
ted it, must have experienced much opposition, through a 
period of time, not less than two hundred and fifty years. 
The exertions of men, on that side, to silence the sacred 
passages which are against them, we fully understand » 
and we may be well assured that their predecessors have 
been animated with the same spirit. 

The gentleman, closes his statement with these words ; 
" Trinitarianism became the order of the day, from the 
reign of Justinian, down through all the dark ages, until 
the time of the reformation." 

As he says, it was a time of great darkness indeed ; and 
long, being upwards of one thousand years. But, if the 
doctrine of the Trinity in Unity, gave that era its sable 
aspect, the present day is not very luminous ; for, the re- 
formed churches as fully believe it now, as the church of 
Rome ever did. It seems to be my opponent's opinion, 
that such a long period of darkness, gave a fine opportu- 
nity to forge, insert and impose the text in debate. The 
doctrine of the Trinity, however, is not of Papal origin. 
It was firmly believed in the earliest times of Christianity, 
and when the church was in her greatest purity; being 
supported by what was deemed " sufficient evidence;" and 
therefore, the Roman Hierarchy were not under the ne- 
cessity of fabricating evidence in its favor. It does not 
appear, that it was ever the desire of the Roman clergy 
to multiply manuscripts, or versions of the Scriptures; 
but, to keep them wholly out of the sight of the laity. If 
we take into view the nature of their scheme, we may easily 
see, that they were under a greater temptation to erase 
some part of the decalogue, than to forge and insert the 
text in dispute. By the account which my opponent has 
given us, the doctrine of the Trinity was not opposed in 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 99 

the dark ages : and, of course, there was no need of for? 
gihg Scripture for its support. He acknowledges, how- 
ever, that "it became a subject of violent controversy 
throughout the christian world," from the days of Arius 
to the commencement of the Papal reign. If the dis- 
puted text be a forgery, there can be no doubt, that the 
crime was committed in the Arian period of time ; for 
then, such a passage was necessary ; and no one supposes 
that it was forged since the reformation. We may be well 
assured, that the Arians were heavily pressed with the ar- 
guments of the Orthodox; and, therefore, they had as 
great need to spike the artillery which was in operation 
against them, as their opponents had to forge such " a can- 
non of war," as the text under consideration. 

The gentleman in opposition, goes on to draw some in- 
ferences from the arguments which he has advanced. 

His first conclusion is ; — " Now the argument stands 
thus — Had 1 John, 5. 7, been known, or contained in 
John's epistle, this was the time when it was wanted." 

This, I cheerfully admit; for " the time" to which he 
alludes, is the Arian period. My opponent, seems to press 
me with this supposed difficulty, namely; — If the text 
had existed then, it would have been largely quoted by the 
writers of that time — they did not use it ; — and, therefore, 
it was not known by them. In my sermons on the pas- 
sage, it was shown, that Jer,om cited it in the beginning 
of the fifth century, and Vigilius at the close of it. Agus- 
tine, Marcus, Celedensis, and Phebadius, used it in the 
fourth century; and, if we may rely on historical testimo- 
ny, it was cited by Athanasius. It was left as a testi- 
mony against the Arians, at the conference held at Car- 
thage, in the fifth century. 

No doubt, the writings of those ancient fathers, have 
suffered greatly by the lapse of ages ; and perhaps by the 



100 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

hands of men. When the Arians had the christian world 
so long under their controul, they had some opportunity to 
alter the works of the early fathers, as well as to mutilate 
the Scriptures. If it should be said-— These things can- 
not be proved against the Arians; my answer is, neither 
can forgery be supported against the Orthodox ; yet, the 
one or the other of these evils has taken place. 

The next conclusion of my opponent, is, that the Ari- 
ans, for the reason which he has assigned, could not have 
altered the Scriptures, nor the writhigs of the fathers, if 
they had been so disposed. He says, " So barefaced an 
attempt could neither have escaped detection, nor fail of 
forming a notorious item of depravity in the history of 
that abominable period , 55 

The gentleman, undoubtedly, means the Arian " peri- 
od ;" and, why he should call it " abominable," is really 
mysterious : — But I have no desire to oppose him on that 
ground. I am fully convinced, that, if in the age in view, 
they could not have been guilty of erasure, nor of omis- 
sions, they have of forgery and insertion ; and either of 
these cases must form such " a notorious item of deprav- 
ity in their history" as he thinks to be impossible. His 
argument goes on the ground, that erasures and omissions, 
w r ere crimes that would have stained the character of that 
age^-that these things were so difficult, that they could 
not have been done ; and, that the Anti-Trinitarians were 
so upright, they would not have attempted them. In res- 
pect to omitting and erasing, he says — " There is no such 
charge exhibited against the Arians, in either the historical 
or theological writers of that age." This stands acknow- 
ledged ; but, does it certainly follow, that no such crimes 
were committed ? There is no charge of forging and in- 
serting any text in our translation " exhibited against the" 



©EJECTIONS ANSWERED. 101 

Orthodox, " by the historical and theological writers of 
that age," nor of any age antecedent to the fifteenth cen- 
tury; yet, it is acknowledged by my opponent himself, 
that the text in debate was quoted seven hundred years, be- 
fore; and, therefore, according to his mode of reasoning 
we may infer, that it was never forged. 

In my sermons on this subject, it has been clearly showa 
that, adding is as great a sin as omitting; and, far more 
difficult to be done without detection. If the gentleman's 
arguments on this head have weight, they prove that 
1 John 5. 7, has neither been erased, omitted nor forged; 
yet, he says, " It is a vile interpolation," and lashes the 
supposed forger, as " a hotheaded Trinitarian zealot." 
Certainly, such reasoning is inadmissible ; and far beneath 
the talents of my acute and learned opponent. 

Notwithstanding the mysterious silence of " the histor- 
ical and theological writers" of ancient times, the text in 
dispute, must have been either inserted, or erased from the 
sacred manuscripts ; and the impartial mind must be con- 
vinced, that one of these crimes must have been commit- 
ted in that very period of time, in which the controversy 
about the Trinity agitated the christian world. 

In respect to erasing or omitting the text in question, 
my opponent says, that, after the reign of Justinian, down 
to the reformation in the sixteenth century, " Anti- Trini- 
tarians have been in a condition altogether inauspicious 
for so wild an undertaking." But, if that be admitted; 
surely, the Trinitarians were not then under any necessity 
of forging a passage, to support their cause against a fallen 
enemy. It was in the Arian period of time, therefore, that 
the mischief must have been done in relation to the text 
under consideration, which ever of the contending parties 
has been guilty. 



102 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

But my opponent, after showing that the Anti-Trinita- 
rians could not have erased nor omitted the text, proceeds 
to what he seems to consider as invincible conclusions 
against its authenticity. Through divine assistance, there- 
fore, I shall endeavor to meet them in the next discourse ; 
for which, may the Lord prepare us. Amen. 



SERMON VII. 



I JOHN, V, 7. 

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, 
the Word, and the Holy Ghost : and these three are 
one. 



As my answer to the gentleman, in opposition, is not 
yet completed, I must proceed with it. 

He seems to be very confident, that the Anti- Trinitari- 
ans, could not have been guilty of erasing this passage 
from the scriptures, nor of omitting it in their transcrip- 
tions. Some reasons for thinking otherwise have been 
given, and more will be offered. 

One of my opponent's formidable conclusions, runs in 
the following summary manner :— " So, we may not only 
expect, but be absolutely sure, that, on the supposition of 
the genuineness of the three heavenly witnesses, the pas- 
sage must, and undoubtedly does, appear in the best and 
most ancient Greek manuscripts — in the most ancient and 
Tespectable versions — in the controversial writings of the 
Trinitarian fathers of every age — and in the orthodox 
creeds and catechisms w T hich have regulated the faith of 
Christendom." 

Some of these objections have been fully answered ; and 
others have been passed bj, to which I shall make my re- 



104 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

served replies. This method has been adopted, to pre- 
serve, as far as possible, a correct arrangement, and avoid 
repetition. 

The gentleman, after closing his supposed invincible 
conclusions, proceeds to mourn over the fallen text, in the 
following plaintive expressions ; — " Alas ! for the famous 
passage, it is not contained in any Greek manuscript of 
respectability, early or late now in existence !" 

But to this, my reply is ; — If it is not contained " in any 
respectable Greek manuscript, this seems to be an ac- 
knowledgment that, it may be found in some which my 
opponent is unwilling to honor with that elevation of char- 
acter. Allowing, that there are no such Greek manu- 
scripts now in being, does that fairly prove, that there never 
have been any such manuscripts on earth ? Are we bound 
wholly to overlook in this case, historical testimony ? 
There are no such cities as the ancient Babylon, Nineveh 
and Tyre, now to be found on the globe ; is it therefore, 
a just conclusion, to say, that no such cities ever existed? 
In my third sermon on the text, it was made to appear, 
that, " Laurentius Valla, an Italian nobleman of great eru- 
dition, undertook a correction of the Greek manuscripts of 
the New-Testament, in the 14th century ; which was 100 
years before the days of Erasmus. If the historical testi- 
mony which I have adduced, may be relied on, he, "by as- 
siduous and long continued exertions, obtained seven 
Greek manuscripts ; and " the text in debate" was found 
in them all." Since that event, five hundred years have 
elapsed ; and, therefore, those manuscripts, like many oth- 
ers, are lost with time. 

It is acknowledged by my opponent himself, that " 132 
manuscripts have been examined by the learned with a par- 
ticular reference to this passage, and have all been found 
silent in relation to the three heavenly witnesses." He 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 105 

says likewise, that there are but 109 of these to be found 
now. According to his statement, we may see, that 23 of 
his own boasted manuscripts have perished since the days 
of Erasmus ; for, he has told us himself, that, from the 
reign of Justinian to the reformation, the subject was laid 
asleep ; and, therefore, during that time, no manuscripts 
would have been examined. We need not be surprised, 
if our seven Greek manuscripts have been lost in the lapse 
of 500 years ; seeing, that 23 of his have perished in 400 
years. We have as good reason to believe that those sev- 
en Greek manuscripts, which history says were in our fa- 
vor, once existed, as he has that the twenty-three have had 
a being, which testified against us. It is not to be doubted, 
that there have been many of both kinds of manuscripts, 
which are now lost with time. The evidence of history in 
such cases, is not to be discarded. 

In what I have said of Laurentius Valla, the truth of it 
is admitted by M. Simon, who was an enemy to the text 
in question. History says, that the Glossa Ordmaria was 
made by Walefrid Strabo, in the ninth century, and from 
Greek manuscripts, some of which were more ancient than 
any now in being. The character of his commentary, 
stands very high in the opinion of an eminent Anti- Trini- 
tarian writer ; and, therefore, it may be consistently es- 
teemed by Trinitarians. The number of Greek manu- 
scripts, which the writer of the Glossa Ordinaria had un- 
der his eye, cannot be ascertained by me ; but, it seems 
that he felt himself warranted to insert in that work, the 
text in question. Our text is likewise found in Jerom's 
Version. It was made in the beginning of the fifth cen- 
tury ; and in doing it, he solemnly asserts, that he wa£ 
guided by the Greek manuscripts. He says, that the 
text "had been adulterated, mistranslated and omitted en, 

purpose to elude the truth." 
O 



106 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 



The Rev. William Jones, observes with great propriety 
that Jerom " had a better opportunity of examining the 
true merits of the cause than we can have at this distance 
of time." As he was convinced of its authenticity, we 
may repose great confidence in his opinion, on the ground 
of his abilities, excellent character, and early standing in 
the Christian church. 

Robert Stephens, found the text contained in nine of his 
sixteen, Greek manuscripts, according to the the testimony 
of William Jones. 

When the Emperor Charlemagne furnished the divines 
of his age with all the manuscripts which could then be 
procured in his dominion ; it appears, that they felt them- 
selves authorized to retain this passage in their correc- 
torium. t 

Thus, we have an authentic account of sixteen Greek 
manuscripts, in which the text in debate was found; 
namely, the seven used by Laurentius Valla, in the four- 
teenth century, and the nine in the possession of Robert 
Stephens ; who lived since the time of the reformation, 
which commenced in the early part of the sixteenth centu- 
ry. We have the testimony of historians, that Walafrid 
Strabo used Greek manuscripts in the ninth century, in for- 
ming his Glossa Ordinaria ; and Jerom likewise, in the 
fifth century, in making his Versions. Allowing that 
those manuscripts have all perished, and that there are, as 
my opponent says, 109 Geeek manuscripts now in being, 
without the disputed text ; I cannot see that it would des- 
troy the evidence which has been produced. The want of 
the passage in the manuscripts which have been mentioned, 
has in some measure been explained, and^ therefore, need 
not be repeated. 

My opponent's next conclusion is, — if the text in ques- 
tion were genuine, it would appear " in the most ancient 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 107 

and respectable versions." He then mentions the follow- 
ing early versions, in which it is not to be found ; " name- 
ly, " the two Syriac, the Coptic and Schidie versions, for- 
med for Upper and Lower Egypt ; the Ethiopic, Arabic , 
Sclavonian and Armenian versions." 

On the supposition that his statement is correct, it must 
be admitted that, they afford no evidence in favor of the 
text under consideration. Those versions, however, were 
probably made in the Arian period, and in the East which 
is a circumstance of great weight in accounting for their 
silence in respect to the passage. My opponent says him- 
self, that immediately after the death of Arius, his doctrine 
gained ground with astonishing rapidity, and seemed to bid 
fair to become the dominant religion, especially in the East*, 
where it prevailed far more generally than in the West. 55 
The want of the text in question, in the versions that the gen- 
tleman has named, may be one reason for those nations 
exchanging Christianity for Mahomedanism, and the Scrip- 
tures for the Koran. But he acknowledges, that it is only 
in the correct editions of the Armenian version, the text in 
dispute is wanting ; and that is admitting, that it does ap- 
pear in the incorrect editions of it. We may be assured, 
wherever this Trinitarian text is found, that manuscript, 
version, or edition, will be deemed incorrect, for that very 
reason. He admits, that the passage is found in the Vul- 
gate version, with the exception of " 29 of its fairest and best 
manuscripts. 55 No doubt, the want of the text, will con- 
stitute a great degree of fairness and excellency in his 
esteem. 

The Vulgate was made for the western part of the 
Christian world, where my opponent says, the doctrine of 
Arius did not so generally prevail. This fact fully accounts 
for the text being found in that version. The gentleman, 
however, attempts to remove every argument arising from 



108 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

this consideration, by saying, — " The Vulgate is the ver- 
sion of the church of Rome, that mother of harlots, that 
mistress of abominations, who has mystery inscribed upon 
her forehead." 

These accusations, however, amount to nothing in relation 
to the subject before us. It was made evident in a former 
part of this controversy, that the church of Rome had no 
motive to forge this disputed text : and, therefore, its being 
in the Vulgate translation, is highly in favor of its authen- 
ticity. We are not told, by my opponent when this trans- 
lation was made, but merely that it was made for the use 
of the Roman church. But as Latin was the language of 
that Empire, the church there, stood in need of such a trans- 
lation from the time of her origin, which reaches back to 
the very age of the apostles. The church of Rome, was 
as sound in the faith as any of the churches of Christ, until 
the beginning of the seventh century. This consideration 
sets the Vulgate on as high ground, as any translation 
whatever. 

It is conceded by my opponent, that there are two ver- 
sions, in which the text in debate appears ; namely, the 
Vulgate, and the incorrect editions of the Armenian version. 
But the author, which I have quoted in my sermons, says, 
" The ancient version into the Armenian language, hath 
always contained it." 

It appears also in the Italic, which is the oldest version 
of the New-Testament, having been made near the days 
of the apostles. Out of nine versions of the Holy Scrip- 
tures, therefore, the text, it seems, appears in three. 

The gentleman in opposition, in another of his conclu- 
sions says, " On supposition of the genuineness of the pas- 
sage, it would be in the controversial writings of the Trini- 
tarian fathers of every age." But, as I have largely re- 
plied to this argument, needless repetition must be avoided. 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 109 

The last of his conclusions is, that, " If it were a genu- 
ine text, it would be found in the orthodox creeds and 
catechisms which have regulated the faith of Christen- 
dom. 

On this, I will just say, if it be not found " in the creeds 
and catechisms," which are " orthodox" and ancient, the 
omission was not for the want of a belief of its authenticity ; 
for it was not disputed until the fifteenth century ; and 
since the art of printing has been invented it has appeared 
in all the editions of the New-Testament, in every lan- 
guage. This is surely, giving it as high a standing as its 
insertion " in creeds and catechisms." 

But I have shown from high authority, that " this verse 
of St. John was inserted in the ancient service-book of the 
Latin Church — in the confession of faith of the Greek 
Church — and also in their Liturgy or public service-book." 
On this head, therefore, I shall say no more at present, but 
proceed to some other objections which seem to be deem-' 
ed formidable by my ingenious opponent. 

In proof of the spuriousness of the text, he says, — " All 
the libraries of Europe, and of the world have been chal- 
lenged, for years, by the learned and highly respectable 
Trinitarian Griesbach, to produce one single decent Greek 
manuscript, ancient or modern, which contains it." 

When such epithets, as " learned mid highly respectable" 
are given by the Anti-Trinitarians to a writer, there is 
reason to fear, that he is nigh to their sentiments. No 
doubt Griesbach is a scholar, and very industrious in col- 
lating ancient manuscripts ; but his challenging " all the 
libraries of Europe, and of the world," as my opponent 
states, is not like the tone of a man, who feels a sacred re- 
gard for Trinitarian doctrines. 

But the gentleman says farther, — " No one of the lear- 
ned Trinitarians has met this confident challenge. No 



110 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

one has dared to pretend that there is any such manuscript 
existing, in any part of the globe." 

It seems the challenge was given " to produce a decent 
Greek manuscript, ancient or modern." It is acknow- 
ledged by my opponent himself, that there are three Greek 
manuscripts which contain the passage ; namely, " the 
Berlin, the Dublin and that of Matthaei." It is admitted 
that they have existed ever since the fifteenth century ; and, if 
they are not entitled to the high character of ancient, sure- 
ly they may be called modem Greek manuscripts. As 
the challenge is, " to produce either ancient or modern 
Greek manuscripts," they could not have been set aside on 
the ground of their age. But it was, perhaps on account of 
not being decent, that they were rejected by Griesbach ; or 
for that reason the Trinitarian divines did not dare pre- 
sent them. To illustrate this case, the gentleman says, — 
" The Dublin manuscript is a transcript, in part, of Cardi- 
nal Zimminie's edition, and contains its typographical mis- 
takes." He says likewise, the Greek manuscript of Mat^ 
thaai, is only a copy of the printed editions of Erasmus and 
Beza." 

But why should printed editions of the Scriptures be 
copied into Greek manuscripts, unless it were to give the 
appearance of authenticity to the text in debate ? Such in- 
sinuations, are implications of Trinitarian honesty, but no 
hints must be given by us, that Anti-Trinitarians have 
ever had any inclination, to lay unhallowed hands on the 
Oracles of God. If we would only believe their word, 
however, their time and eminent learning, have been 
piously occupied in purifying the Scriptures, from Trini- 
tarian adulterations. 

But my opponent goes on to say, — " The Dublin man- 
uscript is not earlier than the 15th century, probably for- 
ged by the British divines, to deceive Erasmus ; and in- 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. Ill 

duce him to put 1 John 5. 7, into his Greek Testament." 
He then asserts, — " So the only three Greek manuscripts 
in existence, which contain the passage of the three hea- 
venly witnesses, are all written since the invention of the 
art of printing ; for which no cause can be assigned, that 
I know of, except the base and wicked design of manufac- 
turing authority for a vile interpolation, which has not the 
countenance of a solitary Greek manuscript on earth." 
The modesty of these assertions is submitted to my hea- 
rers. Admitting, however, that the gentleman's statement 
is correct, it is far from settling the subject in dispute. If 
such Greek manuscripts, as Griesbach requires, are not to 
be found now, this does not prove that there never have 
been any, neither does it invalidate the historical testimo- 
ny which is adduced in my sermons. You see my oppo- 
nent allows the dignified name of Greek manuscripts, to 
109 only ; but, that is not one to a thousand which must 
have existed since the apostolic age. 

In ancient times, every Arian public library might have 
been furnished with such a manuscript of the Scriptures; 
and so might every family of that community, whose pro- 
perty was adequate to the expense of writing it. In the 
eastern section of the Christian world, manuscripts and ver- 
sions, without the text in debate, were probably numerous ; 
and the church in the western section, might have been less 
careful in preserving what are now deemed the only pro- 
per vouchers of the true reading of the Scriptures. From 
an excessive fondness of the Latin language, the church 
of Rome, preferred the Vulgate version to all others. 
This might have made them very indifferent about secu- 
ring the Greek manuscripts which contained the text. 
There is no great want of it in the Latin manuscripts, 
which were used in the western section of Christendom ; 
where the gentleman says, Arianism did not so generally 
prevail. 



112 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

Since the art of printing has been in operation, there 
must be an agreement in all the copies and editions of the 
Scriptures. It was otherwise when all depended on the 
pen. A manuscript then, could easily have been formed ac- 
cording to the mind of the writer, and of those, for 
whose use the copy was designed. It might lie in such 
hands for ages, without being exposed to the critical eye 
of any one who would compare it with other manuscripts, 
or expose its inaccuracies to the world. As this may have 
been the case, the internal character of a given text is, the 
best evidence of its spuriousness or authenticity. On this 
ground, the passage in debate stands Jiigh, bearing the 
marks of divinity and agreement with the Scriptures in 
general ; as has been largely proved in my discourses on 
the subject. 

But my opponent proceeds to say of the Greek manu- 
scripts, that two of them " are considered by the learned, 
as holding the first rank, in respect to age and correct- 
ness. These are called, the Vatican and Alexandrian 
manuscripts." He says, " the Vatican manuscript stands 
first, in point of seniority, and other circumstances, which 
give dignity to its character." Mr. Emlyn, however, who 
is a distinguished Anti-Trinitarian, gives the first rank 
to the Alexandrian copy, according to the authorities 
which I have consulted. The gentleman places the age 
of the Vatican manuscript very high — even up to the be- 
ginning of the third century : but, I think the evidence, 
On which this opinion is founded, is vague and uncertain, 
consisting principally in the conjectures of men who wish 
to give it weight on that account. 

The author quoted by me, says — " The most ancient 
Greek manuscript which is now known to exist, is the 
Alexandrian, for which, Wetstein, who seems to have con- 
sidered the question with great attention, claims no higher 



in 



OBJECTIONS AxNSWERED. 113 

antiquity than the close of the fifth century." If this ac- 
count is correct, it was made when Arianism was in the 
very zenith of its triumph; and made in the east, that 
very part of the world where my opponent says, Arian- 
ism " more generally prevailed." 

There is one circumstance, which greatly confirms me 
the belief, that the Alexandrian and Vatican manu- 
scripts, are of Arian origin and character; and that is, 
their reading of Rev. 1. 10, 11. In the English transla- 
tion, St. John says in that passage — " I heard behind me 
a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying, " I am Alpha and 
Omega, the first and the last : and, what thou seest, write 
in a book." This passage is of as much importance in 
relation to the supreme Deity of Christ, as 1 John, 5. 7, 
is, in respect to the Trinity in unity ; and they are both 
completely silenced by these manuscripts. 

On this text, Dr. Doddridge says — " It has done 
more than any other in the Bible, toward preventing 
me from giving in to that scheme, which would make our 
Lord Jesus Christ no more than a deified creature" His 
remarks as to the effect of this passage on his own mind, 
shews its iveight in supporting the proper Divinity of the 
Redeemer ; and we see how completely these famous 
manuscripts enervate its force and eclipse its glory on that 
subject. 

But the writers of these ancient manuscripts, in making 
them to read so contrary to our translation, have, I think, 

endcred their accuracy very suspicious. 
Every reader may see at once, that the three first chap- 

ers in the book of Revelation, are very remarkable in 
e manner of their composition. There are seven chur- 

hes addressed, in seven distinct epistles. In the com- 
mencement of each epistle, some of the names, perfec- 
tions and operations of Christ are mentioned, to turn tfie 
P 



114 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

apostle's attention to his majesty, authority and glory. 
" To the angel," or minister " of the church of Ephesus," 
lie is directed to " write ; These things saith he that holdeth 
the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst 
of the seven golden candlesticks. — And unto the angel of 
the church in Smyrna write ; These things saith the First 
and the Last, which was dead and is alive. — And to the 
angel of the church in Pergamos write ; These things saith 
he who hath the sharp sword with two edges. — And 
unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write ; These 
things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto 
a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass. — And unto 
the angel of the church in Sardis write; These thing* 
saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven 
stars. — And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia 
write ; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, 
he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no 
man shutteth ; and shutteth, and no man openeth.— And 
unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write: 
These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true Witness, 
the beginning of the creation of God." 

Can we imagine that our Lord would speak of himself 
in such a glorious manner, in each of these seven epistles, 
and yet, when he entered into conversation with St. John, 
respecting these churches in general, speak in the naked 
manner in which his address appears, in the Alexandrian 
and Vatican manuscripts; "saying" only, "what thou 
seest, Write in a book:" without giving himself anty dis- 
tinguishing names, perfections, or operations ? I really 
think, that, if 1 John, 5. 7, "bears the marks of forgery 
upon its very countenance ;" Rev. 1. 11, " bears," in these 
manuscripts, the visible "marks" of mutilation — a mu- 
tilation which leaves it divested of that glory and majesty, 
witk which it is clothed in our translation-— a mutilation 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 115 

that destroys its consistency with the chapter in which 
it stands. In this case the iniquity of so forming these 
manuscripts, must appear with great clearness to every 
candid reader. We have no little reason to believe, that 
the gentleman's 109 Greek manuscripts, form an army, of 
which, the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts are the 
generals. If we may rely on the testimony of the Rev. 
Theophilus Lindsey, these manuscripts are deficient in 
most of the texts of primary importance, relating to the 
Trinity and the Deity of Christ. 

In the view of what he has said, my opponent adds, — 
" I submit it to you all, fellow Christians, and to every 
man's conscience, whether you do not see, in this event, 
the hand of Divine providence visibly stretched out to pre- 
serve the purity of his holy word from the corruptions of 
man, so ordering things that all the Greek manuscripts 
on earth should, with one accord, down to the days of the 
invention of printing, bear united and solemnly silent tes- 
timony against so absurd, contradictory and blasphemous 
an interpolation" 

In what the gentleman has said, our reason and con- 
science are addressed in an awfully solemn manner. 

But if we are in fact going in opposition to the dictates 
of our own mind, in adhering to the text in debate, we 
ai-e exceedingly criminal, and are bound to acknowledge our 
guilt, and to rely on the spurious passage no more. Eyeing 
the providence of God in all events is, undoubtedly, a Chris- 
tian's duty ; and it is very becoming in my opponent, to 
express such a sense of the Divine hand, in preserving the 
Scriptures from human corruptions. 

It is truly pleasing to hear the gentleman calling them 
" God's holy word ;" but it is painful to hear him saying, 
that 1 John, 5. 7, is " an absurdity, a contradiction, an 

homination^ a '\ blasphemous" text, and "a vile interpc- 



116 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

laiion" These charges, however, are very far from being 
just, whether the passage is spurious or genuine. He dis- 
plays such a hostility to the doctrine contained in it, as 
should put us on our guard, as to his arguments against 
its authority. He says, " the hand of Divine providence" 
is against the passage ; but we should remember, that 
providence is often deep and mysterious. Very wrong 
conclusions may be drawn from the dealings of provi- 
dence. A sacred writer says, of God ; " His way is in the 
sea, and his path in the great waters, and his footsteps are 
not known." Another exclaims, " How unsearchable are 
his judgments! and his ways past finding out." But, 
providence has preserved such an evidence of the authen- 
ticity of the disputed text, as induces Christians in gene- 
ral to receive it as a testimony of a Trinity of persons 
in the Godhead. * 

It may be placed in this situation, that the humble may 
believe, and the proud be left to think there is sufficient 
ground to reject it, and to renounce a doctrine, on which, 
salvation depends. Sinners in general, endeavor to sup- 
port themselves in their unbelief, by reasoning in con- 
formity to the feelings of their own hearts. Providence 
is concerned in hardening, as well as in softening the hearts 
of men. " The Lord of hosts" said to Isaiah, " Go and 
tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not ; and 
see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this 
people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes ; 
lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and 
convert, and be healed." St. Paul says of some sinners, 
" Because they received not the love of the truth, that 
they might be saved ; God shall send them strong delu- 
sion, that they may believe a lie : that they all might be 
damned who believe not the truth, but had pleasure in un- 
righteousness." 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 117 

The providence of God, involving this text in a de- 
gree of uncertainty, as some consider it to be, is no more 
proof of its spuriousness, than the burying of the only 
copy of the law in the rubbish of the temple, proved, that 
no such book was ever given to Israel. We think, that 
we are no more disposed to believe, independently of ev- 
idence, than our opponents. 

I shall pass over a considerable part of the gentleman's 
discourse, as answering it would be a recapitulation of 
arguments, which I have already endeavored to meet. I 
will just apprise you, however, that mention is made of 
Mr. Travis, as " a blundering copyist of a French author, 
called Martyn ;" but I intend to make some remarks on 
Mr. Travis hereafter ; and, therefore, I shall drop the 
matter at present. 

There is an observation in what is passed over, in re- 
gard to Athanasius ; calling him " the god-father of 
Trinitarianism,'' the reducer of it " to its present ortho- 
dox form." A reply, however, is not deemed necessary ; 
for it has been largely shown that the doctrine of the Trin- 
ity in unity, was understood and firmly believed by the 
church of Christ, long before the days of Athanasius, even 
up to the time of the apostles. 

In the gentleman's next paragraph, some anathemaes 
appear against the text in question ; and a prediction, that 
it is soon to be annihilated from the book of God. He 
calls its supporters also " enthusiastic devotees ;" but, as 
these things are not arguments, they require no answer. 
This discourse may, therefore, be closed with that apos- 
tolic injunction ; "prove all things ; hold fast that which 
is good." Amen. 



SERMON fill 



I JOHN, V. 7. 

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Fa- 
ther, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are 
one. 



The gentleman in opposition, has been followed 
through the greater part of his arguments against the Di- 
vine authority of this passage ; — but the closing part of his 
discourse, remains to be answered. As he seems to place 
great reliance on what he has yet to say, a more particular 
reply is requisite. 

He says, " One more short argument, and I will relieve 
your patience." It is an " argument which cannot fail of 
its becoming influence with all those, who, as they do not 
profess to be versed in Biblical criticism, must of course, 
depend, in these matters, upon the united decisions of the 
learned." 

By " the learned," on whose " united decisions," the 
unlettered part of mankind " must depend," my opponent 
seems to mean, such writers as have signalized themselves 
in their critical opposition to the text ; for, if the suffrage 
of " the learned" were to be taken, we cannot doubt, but 
the majority would be in its favor. If " the united decis- 
ions of the learned," were against the passage, it ought to 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 119 

be given up by common readers, and be printed no more 
in any of the subsequent translations and editions of the 
New- Testament. It rather appears, however, to be the 
opinion of my opponent, that all who undertake in favor of 
the text, are so deficient in oriental learning, critical 
ability, close investigation, and theological integrity, that 
no confidence can be placed in their judgment. 

If this be the case, it is highly necessary that this class 
of u the learned," should immediately produce a corrected 
translation of the Scriptures, that the illiterate and depend- 
ent part of mankind, may be rescued from the base idolatry 
of worshipping Jesus Christ ; and, from the crime of rest- 
ing on his atonement for salvation, instead of their own 
merits. If Trinitatarian forgery, and their imposition in 
" manufacturing authority for vile interpolations," has led 
to such a departure from the pure worship of God, it is high 
time that some efficient measures should be taken w r ith the 
Scriptures. But, alas ! the "united decisions" of the 
Anti- Trinitarians appear to have little effect in reforming 
the world ; for they do not seem to " commend" them- 
selves to the " conscience in the sight of God." 

I shall now proceed to examine my opponent's " short," 
but powerful" argument. He commences with saying, — 
" The passage of the three heavenly witnesses, in 1 John. 
5. 7, namely, these words, " In heaven, the Father, the 
Word, and the Holy Ghost : and these three are one ; and 
there are three that bear record on earth" is a passage now 
admitted by the most eminently learned divines in Europe, 
of various denominations, Trinitarians as w T ell as others, to 
be a vile forgery ; and so notoriously is this the fact, that 
there is not a learned man, at this day, in Europe, whether 
divine or civilian, who would degrade his character as a 
Biblical critic, by venturing on the defence of it." 

In this strong sentence, the first thing to be noticed, is. 



120 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

that all the " learned Trrinitarian divines in Europe, admit" 
this text " to be a vile forgery." This statement is distinctly 
denied by me ; and, in doing it, the following reasons may 
be offered. 

1. The late Rev. Claudius Buchannan, D. D. who held 
a high rank in England as a pious divine, and a pre-emi- 
nent orientalist, whose praise is in the churches, has une- 
quivocally declared, that he fully believed 1 John, 5. 7, to 
be a genuine text of Scripture. For this fact, I appeal to 
all who have read his Christian Researches in Asia. 

2. The late Dr. Scott, also, who both as a divine and a 
scholar is well known, has given his opinion in favor of the 
text, as has been clearly shown in my sermons. 

3. The Rev. Ralph Wordlaw, who is a very learn- 
ed and distinguished divine in Scotland, in speaking of 
this text, suggests no belief of its being "a vile forgery." 
In respect to its authenticity, I have acknowledged, that 
he expressed some degree of doubt; but, that is very 
far from admitting it to be "a vile interpolation" 

4. There is a case, that is obvious to every one, the 
consideration of which, must reflect great light on this 
subject. It is this: — New editions of the Scriptures are 
constantly appearing from the presses of Europe in gene- 
ral, and England in particular, which all contain the verse 
in question. If the learned, throughout Europe and 
Great Britain, all know that the text in dispute is " a vile 

forgery" why have they not prevented its appearance in 
every edition of the Bible that has been published, since 
this conviction has taken place in their minds ? Bible So- 
cieties are very extensive in that section of the globe: 
and by their exertions, the Scriptures have been recently 
translated into many languages, and largely circulated 
throughout the world ; but, we have no account that the 
text has been left out of any edition or translation what- 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 121 

ever. If the gentleman's bold assertion be correct, what 
can we think of the orthodox divines of Europe ? Will 
they impose " vile forgeries" on the poor heathen, for the 
word of the living God, when they not only know, but 
have admitted that they are such ? My opponent's asser- 
tion, I think, must be questioned on sober reflection, and, 
doubtless, he would not have ventured it, unless he had 
received such communications from the British Anti-Trini- 
tarians; but it is surprising, that he should either rely on 
such information himself, or hold it up to the world as 
deserving credit. 

In his mind, however, this difficulty may be surmounted, 
by a belief, that no Trinitarian divines are entitled to the 
honor of being learned, who do not appear in opposition 
to the text; and that the number of those is so small, 
that they find themselves incapable of correcting the wil- 
fulness and ignorance of the others. The Anti-Trinita- 
rian divines, seem to flatter themselves with the idea, that 
they are all learned and great; and that the Trinitarian 
clergy, are almost universally deficient in these respects. 
The public mind, however, may differ with them in this 
matter. Self complacency is natural. 

The second thing to be noticed in my opponent's sweep- 
ing statement, is™ " That there is not a learned man, at 
this day in Europe, whether divine or civilian, who would 
degrade his character as a biblical critic, by venturing on 
a defence of this text." He says further — " The learned 
Porson, in his reply to Travis, has settled this controversy 
forever." 

But, to this assertion, my reply is — If by " this day," 
be meant strictly the present one ; it is neither in the gen- 
tleman's power, nor in mine, to determine the case. If, 
however, by " this day" be meant, any time past in this 
enlightened century, he is certainly incorrect in his asser- 
tion ; for, Dr. Scott, in his note on the text, has ventured 

Q 



122 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

to say many things in its defence. Are we to think he is 
not "a learned man," a . " divine," nor a " civilian . ? " He 
had the vanity to think, when he was an And- Trinitarian, 
that few could equal him in mental endowments; which 
he has freely acknowledged in a book, called, " The Force 
of Truth," which is an account of his life and conversion. 

I cannot say, however, that there has been any elabo- 
rate treaties recently written in defence of the text in de- 
bate. It is very probable, the European divines on the 
side of Orthodoxy, may be of the opinion that the passage 
has been sufficiently vindicated bythe writers of former times. 

But, if the learned Trinitarians of Europe, dare n< 
" venture their character as Biblical critics," in " defence' 
of the passage ; to act an ingenuous part, they ought 
abandon it; but this, they have never done. 

My opponent says — "The learned Person, has setth 
this controversy forever." If this be in fact the case, Dr. 
Scott must have known it ; and, instead of vindicating the 
words, he ought to have announced their spuriousness. 
These considerations must have weight with candid peo- 
ple ; and evince the vanity of my opponent's triumphant 
assertions. What " the learned Porson" has done, I can- 
not say; but, we may fairly suppose, that the grand ar- 
guments on that side of the question have been exhibited 
by the gentleman himself, the examination of which, is 
now in progress. We see the difficulties, therefore, with 
which the orthodox European divines and civilians, would 
have to -contend. I cannot see yet, that they are insupera- 
ble ; nor how any man would have to " sacrifice his character 
as a Biblical critic," in facing them. 

The next tiling in the gentleman's discourse, is, " The'cele- 
brated Griesbach, whose critical and purified Greek Testa- 
ment is now used as the standard in the European Colleges, 
and is taking the same rank in the literary institutions of 
this country, has left out this passage from bis text" 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 123 

This stands acknowledged. That, however, does not 
positively prove that the text is an interpolation ; unless 
the infalibility of that learned critic can be maintained. 
It is no new thing for great men to undertake against 
truth, and to influence the public mind on the side of er- 
ror, to a high degree. 

The reasons are before us, which led him to renounce 
the text in question; namely, the want of it in the Greek 
manuscripts. He, undoubtedly, felt himself justified as a 
learned critic, to relinquish it on that ground ; and, being 
probably disposed to do it, he might think, that the evi- 
dence he acted on, would be a sufficient apology, in the 
view of the world. We, however, have a right to judge 
for ourselves concerning the evidence on which he decided. 
His "purified Testament," as my opponent calls it, is cor- 
rected in conformity to some of the Greek manuscripts ; 
but, I really believe their accuracy is very questionable ? 
and my reasons for this opinion have been assigned, 

In respect to Griesbach's Testament, my opponent says, 
with an air of exultation, that, "it is now used as the 
standard in the European colleges, and is taking the same 
rank in the literary institutions of our country." But to 
this I reply, although his Testament may have its excel- 
lencies, it must be allowed, that, like all other human pro- 
ductions, it may have also its defects. 

With all the boasted accuracy of Griesbach, his reading 
of 1 Tim. 3. 16; "and without controversy, great is the 
mystery of godliness: he who was manifested in the flesh ;" 
iustead of " God was manifest in the flesh," as it is in our 
translation, is boldly disputed by Mr. Wakefield, who is 
himself an Anti-Trinitarian. Mr. W. contends for the cor- 
rectness of the English New-Testament in this respect ; 
that instead of " He who," it ought to be, " Godioas manifest 
in the flesh ;" but, he endeavors to effect an escape from the 
meaning of the passage, by an Anti- Trinitarian exposition. 



124 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

But, there are two considerations in respect to Gries- 
bach's performance, which make me feel some apprehen- 
sion of danger. The first is — Anti-Trinitarians seem to 
be anticipating a complete victory over the Orthodox; 
and his Greek Testament, appears to be one ground on 
which their ho >e of this is founded. The second consid- 
eration is— The learned, on the Orthodox side of the 
question, seem not to be apprehending any danger from 
that quarter. But what the event of these high anticipa- 
tions on the one hand, and such apparent security on the 
other, will finally amount to, time only can determine. 
I have some fear ; but my prayer is, that it may be ground- 
less. The great Head of the Church, says in one of his 
instructive parables, that it was " while men slept, the en- 
emy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went 
his way." The learned are liable to their peculiar 
prejudices, and exposed to alarming changes, under 
the operation of certain causes, as well as the illiterate, 
and less discerning part of men. It was by some such 
means, undoubtedly, that in the Arian period of time, the 
learned, as well as others, were enveloped with the sable 
cloud of theological delusion. We must admit, on the 
principle of analogical reasoning, that such painful scenes 
may be realized again, in this fallen and God-opposing 
world. With due deference to, and confidence in the 
learned among the Orthodox, it behoves the Church to 
watch, and to take the alarm, whenever the grand doc- 
trines of the gospel are attacked, directly or indirectly. 
The great adversary is not asleep; and he may invent 
ways of leading the scholar, as well as the unlettered 
Christian, into the devious paths of heresy and danger. 
To pollute the fountains of religious knowledge, is the 
most direct method that can be adopted, to defile all the 
streams which issue from them. In this case, however, 
our hope must be placed in God : for he is the tower ef 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 125 

defence, both in relation to his written word and redeemed 
people. 

But, my hearers, what is the grand object of such a 
tremendous and unremitting opposition to 1 John, 5. 7, 
and all the other sacred passages of a similar import ? 

The Rev. Theophilus Lindsey expressly says, — " The 
tendency of the whole is to show, that the bulk of Chris- 
tians, formany ages, have been worshipping two new Gods, 
who are no Gods at all, Jesus and the Holy Spirit ; putting 
them on an equality with the Supreme Father and Sove- 
reign Lord of all." 

We may see, therefore, that the grand design of every 
writer in this school is, to remove the belief of Christ's 
Deity, and the distinct personality of the Holy Ghost from 
our mind; and, on that very account, it becomes its to 
look well to their criticisms, before we renounce the pas- 
sages of Scripture, which support these fundamental truths 
of the Christian system. 

But, the feelings of Griesbach, in relation to the doc- 
trine of the Trinity may be learned, by a view of the fol- 
1 owing paragraph, selected from his essay on 1 John, 5. 7. 
It is contained in my opponent's discourse, and was deliv- 
ered in this house, with a high tone of approbation and 
triumph. The paragraph in view, runs in this manner, — 
"If witnesses so few, so recent, so suspicious, and argu- 
ments so utterly frivolous, as are produced in defence of 
this passage, are competent to establish the genuineness of 
a reading, in opposition to such a multitude of unanswera- 
ble testimonies and arguments— there can be no criterion 
of truth and falsehood, in criticism, and the whole text 
of the New-Testament, is unsubstantiated and dubi- 
ous— 'and I would undertake, if k were worth while, to 
defend six hundred notoriously spurious and universally 
rejected readings, by testimonies and arguments far more 
numerous and powerful, than any which are used by the 



126 * OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

patrons of this verse — and I wish these things may be well 
considered by those, who may think proper to come forward 
in a cause, in which the acuieness of a Krittelius, the sa- 
gacity of a Hazelius, and the zeal of Travis (but not ac- 
cording to knowledge, and, therefore, severely castigated 
by the learned Porson and Marsh) have labored angrily 
and in vain." 

To say the least of this, I think, it is far fr©m bearing 
the complexion of Trinitarian language. But the argu- 
ments which this writer calls "few, recent, suspicious, and 
frivolous" some of them have been laid before you, and 
their strength or imbecility is submitted to your judg- 
ment. 

What this gigantic Biblical critic, is pleased to call 
" unanswerable testimonies and arguments," the gentle- 
man in opposition to me, has, doubtless, presented us with 
some of them, in his elaborate discourse. But, if they be 
"unanswerable" then all I have said, falls to the ground, 
as far as it relates to the authenticity of the text in dis- 
pute. 

The case, my hearers, is now submitted to your candid 
decision, in respect to the orthodoxy of Griesbach. 

I must say, that I cannot see how such arguments as 
have been advanced, in my discourses on the text in ques- 
tion, would destroy the " criterion of truth and falsehood 
in criticism, " and leave " the whole text of the New- Tes- 
tament unsubstantiated and dubious." In my humble 
opinion, there is an important rule in determining the di- 
vinity of a given text, which seems to have been over- 
looked by Griesbach, and, perhaps, by many others; 
namely, its internal character, and agreement with the 
other parts and doctrines of the Scriptures. According to 
this rule, the text in debate stands firm. The internal evi- 
dence of the Bible at large, has been considered by divines 
of the first eminence, as a proof of its authenticity ; a 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 127 

why a rule which is applied to the whole, with supposed 
success, should be inapplicable to a part, and not sufficient 
to support its authority, is to me, mysterious. 

There is one thing in the quotation from Griesbach, 
that is rather enigmatical. It is this, — " And I would un- 
dertake, if it were worth while, to defend six hundred 
notoriously spurious and universally rejected readings by 
testimonies and arguments, far more numerous and pow- 
erful, than any which are used by the patrons of this 



verse " 



Does this saying, look like a man, who feels a tender 
regard for the honor of God's word ?' like a holy fear of 
unhinging the minds of people in respect to that invaluable 
Book, which was given " to make them wise unto salva- 
tion." Let him be ever so highly honored by the learned 
world, I think his statement is sanguine and alarming. It 
sounds like infidelity, rather than a humble faith in the Or- 
acles of God. If there be " six hundred notoriously spuri- 
ous and universally rejected. readings" in our translation, it 
must be a very uncertain guide to the common reader ; and, 
to" proclaim, such a thing in the ears of those, who hate the 
Scriptures, and wish to deny their authority, appears to 
be a rash and unguarded step. Even allowing Griesbach 
to be a Christian and a Trinitarian, this assertion cannot 
fail in having its effect, in enlarging the ranks of unbe- 
lievers. 

But as this celebrated critic announces, that these " six 
hundred spurious readings" may be defended " by more 
numerous and powerful arguments" than 1 John, 5. 7, I 
am inclined to think that they are entitled to our confi- 
dence. 

It seems, however, to have been Griesbach's object, to 
deter every one from venturing any more to support the 
text in debate, by saying : The " acute Krittelius, the 
sagacious Hazelius, and the zealous Travis," have labored 



123 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

in this desperate case, " angrily and in vain." But if they 
have failed in supporting the cause of that passage, they 
have shown much regard to an important gospel doctrine ; 
and, therefore, they might have expected more lenity from 
this Biblical critic, if he is a Trinitarian, than to say that 
they have been " severely castigated by Porson and 
Marsh, and labored angrily and in vain." 

No doubt, Griesbach is a scholar, an able critic, and 
has some claim to respect ; but I think his' orthodoxy is 
questionable.* There is no need, however, of denying 
learning and merit to any gentleman, because he differs 
from us in theological opinion. Men of small parts and 
learning may have correct views of divine subjects, while 
men of extensive learning and capacity may adopt the 
wildest theories in relation to these things. But, Anti- 

*The authority of Griesbach is not universally submitted to, by the 
learned in Europe. Richard Lawrence, L. L. D. Rector of Mershem, Eng- 
land, published a pamphlet in 1814, which was reviewed id the Christian Ob- 
server, vol. 13. page 573, in which he makes some objections against Gries- 
bach's method of deciding on the authenticity of the various readings, of dif- 
ferent manuscripts, and makes some statements which are calculated very 
much to shake our confidence in any of Griesbach's decisions. He states, tha^ 
Griesbach admits that there were five or six classes of manuscripts, but con- 
fined himself to the examination of three classes only ; that he adopted a mode 
of deciding en the classification of man uscrpts, which was merely arbitrary 
and which yet had an important influence in forming bis ultimate decisions. 
He declares that very material inaccuracies were committed by Griesbach in 
his enumeration of the. various readings, and points out some instances, of 
decisions directly contrary to his own rules. The result of Dr. Lawrence's 
examinatien, appeared to be a full conviction in his mind that no reliance 
was to be placed in Griesbach's authority, and that his classification of manu- 
scripts, by which his decisions were supported, was principally made to sub- 
serve the purpose of critical conjecture. Thus much for the undisputed author- 
ity of Griesbach. One word as to his orthodoxy, lie indeed professes to be- 
lieve in the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ. But while he makes this pio- 
fession, one of the rules by which he decides on the various readings is singu- 
lar enough. It is in these words ; " Amongst various readings that which be- 
yond the rest manifestly favors the tenets of the orthodox is deservedly ws- 
pected." (The above note was communicated to the author by a learned 
friend.) 




OBJECTIONS ANSWEREB. 129 

Trinitarians seem to think that our incorrectness in doc- 
trine must originate from a want of talents ; and, therefore, 
they are constantly holding up the idea of Trinitarian 
weakness. We have no need of denying these endow- 
ments to them, to account for their deficiency in the 
knowledge of divine truth ; for we believe it to be of a 
moral nature. It is said by Jesus Christ, " If any man 
will do his will, he shall know of his doctrine whether it 
be of God." His apostle says likewise, " The world by 
wisdom knew not God." "Not many wise men after 
the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called." 
The doctrines of the cross were, to the learned Greeks, 
foolishness. We must, therefore, " become fools''' in the 
view of learned sinners, to be made wise unto salvation." 
The gentleman, after giving us ah account of Gries- 
bach's rejecting the text in debate from his purified Greek 
Testament, and his remarks on its spuriousness ; proceeds 
to give his opinion of Mr. Travis, from whose works, part 
of the historical evidence in favor -of its authority has been 

taken. 

He says, " Of this Travis, who is so puffed off here in 
America, by those, who know g of the man, and 

who are totally unacquainted with the state of this contro- 
versy, the celebrated professor Michaelis mstly observes ; 
he is indisputably half a century behind hand in critical 
knowledge, and consequently, unacquainted with matters 
now universally known." 

I would just remark, that whenever my opponent has 
occasion to speak of Mr. Travis, he invariably uses the 
language of indignity and contempt. In the outset of 
his discourse, he has once condescended to call him Mr. 
Travis ; but, after his mind became warmed with argu- 
ment, no terms of tenderness or gentility are any more 
admitted. The verv next time he speaks of him, it is m 
R 



130 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 



a highly degrading manner : — saying, " notwithstanding 
the pretence of Travis, and Marty n the Frenchman, from 
whom this same Travis has copied, without giving credit 
for it." We see, my hearers, that the original is treated 
with as little ceremony as the copyist. The Americans, 
who are said to " puff off" this feeble writer, are mention- 
ed in a way not very flattering to their feelings. They 
are represented as not knowing how inferior Mr. Travis is, 
and of being entirely ignorant of the true grounds of the 
controversy respecting the text in question. He con- 
temptuously calls them, " enthusiastic devotees," and 
speaks of their mocking at the invincible arguments ad- 
duced against an " evident interpolation," on which, 
" the mene tekel of God and man is inscribed ; and which 
is, in a little time, to be " blotted out of the book of life, 
and consigned to the abodes of annihilation." 

To these reveries of the gentleman, I shall not reply. 
They are not of the most conciliating kind; but divine 
rule forbids us to " render evil for evil." 

When my opponent, however, has occasion to speak of 
the writers who stand opposed to the text, he gives incon- 
testable proof of his knowledge of refinement. Then he 
can say — " The pre-eminently learned, and Trinitarian 
Michaelis — the most learned orientalist that Europe ever 
produced — the most deeply versed in Biblical criticism — 
and one of the wisest and worthiest of men." Such 
pleasing adjectives, also, as " celebrated, famous, learned, 
and highly respectable, are applied by my opponent to 
Griesbach, Porson and Marsh. It is, no doubt, to shake 
our confidence in the knowledge and veracity of the Rev. 
George Travis, that he is mentioned by the gentleman in 
such a degrading manner. As this appears to be the case, 
it becomes necessary for me to make some observations 
in regard to his standing. 





OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 161 

We have no right to view him as being deficient, either 
in learning, or uprightness. If my opponent had allowed 
these endowments to any other writers in opposition to his 
scheme, we should have more reason to repose confidence 
in his opinion of Mr. Travis. As this is not the case, we 
may believe, that he is, on such accounts, as respectable 
as any other Trinitarian authors. With respect to Mr. 
Travis, a learned divine says, in his defence of 1 John, 5. 7. 
"For these testimonies, we are indebted to the judicious 
and learned works of the Rev. George Travis, A. M. 
Prebendary of Chester, and Vicar of Eastham, who in 
his letters to 'Edward Gibbon, Esq. has rescued this text 
from the hands of its adversaries, and conferred on 
the church an obligation of the liveliest gratitude and 
love." 

Mr. Travis, it seems, was an Episcopalian divine, of 
some eminence, and possessed the degree of A. M. in the 
department of learning. As he undertook a defence of 
the text in question, it is a proof of his soundness as to 
the doctrine of the Trinity ; and, we may think, no incon- 
siderable evidence of his piety. In appearing as an au- 
thor, he made himself responsible to the world for the 
truth of his statements. This was a powerful motive to 
deter him from the most distant approach to falsehood ; 
and, therefore, we may conclude, that he has not tarnish- 
ed his character by taking such a wicked and dangerous 
stand. 

It is a vain attempt in my opponent, to think of inval- 
idating the historical testimony of Mr. Travis, in favor of 
the text; for the Rev. W. Jones and Dr. Gill, have, in 
substance, given the same historical account. The Rev. 
James Sloss preached eighteen sermons on this text, in 
Nottingham, England, in 1736, and he gives the very- 
same historical account of its authenticity, that is given 



132 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED, 

by Mr. Travis. He first cites Tertullian, who lived in 
the beginning. of the second century. The very words 
of that ancient father, M. Sloss.says, are these: 

" The connection of the Father in the Son, and of 
the Son in the Comforter, makes three joining together, 
the one of which is from the other, which Three are One 
Thing" Tertull. Contra Prax. Chap. 25. This, my 
author says, "is an exact translation of the latter clause 
of" the verse in dispute. He says, that " Cyprian, who 
lived in the next century, cites this text; saying, "And 
again it is written, of the Father, Son, and Spirit, These 
Three are One." Cyp. de uni. Eccl. cap. 4. ad finem. 

This quotation from Cyprian, is evidently the last clause 
of 1 John, 5. 7. But it is needless to swell my pages 
with the evidence that follows, for it is in exact accor- 
dance with the historical testimony of Mr. Travis. In 
one word, all who have w r ritten in defence of the text, 
have given the same historical account of its authenticity ; it 
is needless, therefore, for my opponent to think to carry 
his point, by sinking the respectability of Mr. Travis as 
an author. 

But the gentleman says — " To conclude — so fully aban- 
doned is this passage in England, by Trinitarians, that in 
the London Evangelical Magazine, published in the latter 
part of the last century, and continued in this, and read 
by the people very generally, I have seen the severe stric- 
tures of Professor Michaelis upon this passage quoted 
with approbation." 

In regard to the British Trinitarians having given up 
the text under consideration, sufficient has been said al- 
ready. 

I cannot say what the London Evangelical Magazine 
contains, in reference to this passage, being wholly unac- 
quainted with that publication. But there is no doubt in 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 133 

in my mind, that there are many things published in Eng- 
land under specious names, whose complexion is Anti- 
Trinitarian. It is well understood that gentlemen of that 
school, in England, are struggling for victory, with a zeal 
that would confer honor on a better cause. 

The gentleman closes his elaborate discourse, with the 
following tremendous sentence; namely — "If any man, 
after being made acquainted with these various facts, now 
presented to him, is so devoid of candor, of modesty, of 
the sense of shame, and the love of truth, as to rely upon 
this notoriously spurious passage, in proof of a three-fold 
God, I feel compelled to adopt the language of the Almigh- 
ty, and say, " Ephraim is joined to idols, let him alone." 

I shall only say, in reply to this extraordinary effort of 
my opponent's talent and spirit, that it may be considered 
as some apology for the severities of which I may be 
deemed guilty, in the course of my strictures on his per- 
formance. But, after all that he has said, I remain in the 
belief, that the text in debate is of divine authority. 

If I be, however, " devoid of candor, of modesty, of the 
sense of shame and the love of truth," the crime is great; 
but, I am not yet convinced of any guilt in this matter. I 
am not willing to be frightened out of my opinion, by the 
mere force of unsupported expressions. The gentleman's 
eloquence far exceeds, in my view, the power of his argu- 
ments. 

These things, however, must be submitted to the candid 
judgment of the christian world, as far as they may fall un- 
der their review. 

There is one circumstance, however, which prevents me 
from closing my reply, with what; has been said, to my 
accomplished opponent. In the fourth sermon, some no- 
tice was taken of the faith of the Syrian christians, in re- 
lation to the doctrine of the Trinity ; which led him to 



134 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

complain, that I had omitted one thing that ought to have 
been mentioned ; namely, the situation of the manuscripts, 
which Dr. Buchannan found in their possession, respect- 
ing the text in dispute. For this omission my apology is ; 
I had not the Researches of that worthy minister of Christ 
before me, when I mentioned the belief of the Syrian 
christians, in the doctrine of the Trinity. What I then 
said, was taken from an extract. 

When my sermon was written, I did not feel myself ca- 
pable of doing justice to that part of the subject, from the 
mere strength of memory. I had expressly acknowledged, 
that the text in dispute was wanting in many versions and 
manuscripts of the Scriptures ; and that was all which I 
supposed to be incumbent on me. My opponent has 
wholly overlooked the argument himself, in his written 
discourse. But, as he has now mentioned the thing, a re- 
ply becomes necessary ; and, at present, the Researches 
are before me. 

It is true, that Dr. Buchannan acknowledges that 1 
John, 5. 7, is not in any manuscript or copy of the Scrip- 
tures, which he examined among the insulated christians 
of Syria. But the Dr. says, their Bishop did not claim an 
antiquity for the oldest of them, above one thousand years ; 
which does not carry them above the 9th century. It is 
highly probable, that those Eastern christians were fur 
nished with their Scriptures in the time of the Arian con- 
troversy ; and, therefore, no new argument arises from 
that quarter, in opposition to the text in view. 

According to the account which they gave to the Dr. 
they received their version of the Scriptures in the fourth 
century. They had evidently some connection with the 
rest of the christian world, during the Arian contest ; for, 
the name of one of their Bishops is found on the doings 
of the Nicene council. After the Dr's. statement, that the 







OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 135 

text in debate is not in any copy of the Syrian Scriptures 
which he had seen ; he expressly says : 

" But notwithstanding this omission, and notwithstand- 
ing the great display of learning in maintaining a contrary 
opinion, I believe the passage to be genuine." We see, 
therefore, that one European Trinitarian divine of the first 
eminence, and who, to use the words of my opponent, 
" has lived with ourselves in the same enlightened age," 
has not abandoned the text in question. The reasons 
which induced him to be of this opinion, must, undoubted- 
ly, have an equal weight with many Trinitarians in Eng- 
land, and on the European continent. 

It is highly probable, that the same reasons induced Dr. 
Buchannan to believe in the authority of the text at issue, 
on which my ,own mind rests. There is no other way, 
that I can see, in which he could account for the want of 
it in the Syrian Scriptures. But the opinion of that lear- 
ned and justly celebrated divine, must have great weight 
on candid minds. The character he sustained — the abilities 
he possessed— the time in which he lived— and the advan- 
tage he was under to know the true merits of this contro- 
versy ; set him on high ground, to judge with accuracy in 
the case. 

I shall now close my reply to the gentleman in opposi- 
tion, without changing my mind as to the authority of the 
text in dispute. It is my design, in the next sermon, to 
sum up the evidence on each side of the grand question ; 
carefully to weigh it ; and then, make some reflections o® 
the subject- Amen. 



SERMON IX. 

I JOHN, V, 7. 



For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father ? 
the Word, and the Holy Ghosl : and these three are 
one. 



In the view of my sermons on this passage, and the 
contest with my opponent on its authenticity ; I shall now 
proceed in summing up the evidence on each side of the 
question, and then make some reflections. 

The testimonies, for and against the text in debate, have 
been sufficiently illustrated. It only remains, to select the 
main things on which a reliance may be placed ; and to 
form an impartial decision in relation to its spuriousness or 
authenticity. 

Here, the seat of the disinterested and unbiassed judge 
should be taken, instead of the stand of the warm advo- 
cate, or the zealous feelings of the partizan of a particular, 
system. Candor and close attention are very necessary, 
to form a correct judgment in a case of this nature. But, 
to take this elevated stand, which is so beautiful in theory, 
so proper in itself, and so expressive of a noble and gener- 
ous mind, is no.t very easy for beings, who possess the feel- 
ings of fallen men. We can very easily see the want of 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 137 

candor in an opponent ; but, to discern it in ourselves, is 
more difficult. 

Prejudices which are deeply rooted and of long stand- 
ing, are very powerful, and not easily removed. We are apt 
to view our honor and interest, as inseperably connected 
with the stand that we take in relation to religious senti- 
ments. 

It is not an easy thing, therefore, to change our opinion 
on subjects of this nature ; and, more especially, when that 
opinion is in favor of a doctrine which is congenial with 
the depraved feelings of the heart. We, who profess to be 
Orthodox, may find some difficulty in divesting ourselves 
of biasses, which are unfavorable to correct judging, in res- 
pect to the subject in view ; and, if our opponents think, 
that they are wholly unbiassed, and prepared to judge ac- 
cording to truth in this matter ; the judgment day, per- 
haps, may convince them of their mistake. 

As the text in question relates to an infinitely interes- 
ting doctrine, it is not to be expected that people of oppo- 
site principles will feel very disinterested, in forming their 
conclusions for or against its authenticity. Under these 
impressions, we may now proceed to take a summary 
view of the evidence on each side of this momentous and 
contested subject. In doing this, it will be proper, 

I. To state the testimony which lies against the pas- 
sage in dispute. No notice, however, will be taken of 
what my opponent has urged against its internal character ; 
for, no candid mind can deem it to have any weight. But, 
that there is external evidence against it, is a thing, that I 
have not denied. In giving a condensed account of that, 
on which reliance may be placed, it may be observed, 

1. It is not an evidence in its favor, that there is not 
more account of it in the writings of the early fathers, 

against the Anti- Trinitarians. We have seen, however. 

S 



138 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

that it has been quoted by some writers of every century* 
up to the apostolic age ; but if that kind of testimony were 
more abundant, the evidence that it was actually in the 
autograph of St. John, would be greater. How far the 
reasons which have been given for this deficiency ought to 
have weight, it is your province to decide. They were 
these, — That, but few writings, so ancient, have come 
down to us; and such as have, may have been greatly al- 
tered, through the want of care, in transcribing ; or with 
the design of involving the text in suspicion, in the view of 
succeeding generations. But let the cause of this deficien- 
cy be what it may, it is an argument which will be urged, 
by some, against the authority of the passage. 

2. The want of this text in so many versions of the 
Scriptures, is an unfavorable circumstance. No candid 
advocate for its authority will deny this, whose mind is 
well informed. The gentleman in opposition has stated, 
that there are seven versions, in which the text is not 
found ; namely : the two Syriac versions ; the Schidie and 
Coptic versions ; and the Ethiopic, Arabic and Sclavonic 
versions. Dr. Buchannan says also, that it is not to be 
found in any manuscript, or copy of the Scriptures which 
he had seen, among those Christians that he discovered, in 
the interior of Asia. This, we must acknowledge, is un- 
favorable. These considerations, with the manner in 
which they have been accounted for, should be very care- 
fully weighed. To say these things form no ground to 
doubt of the authenticity of this text, would be an evidence 
of imbecility and prejudice. They have caused some of 
the Orthodox to hesitate, and all its enemies to oppose 
it with great apparent confidence. An entire disregard to 
these unfavorable things, is inconsistent with impartiality in 
judging. 

3. The want of this text in the Greek manuscripts, is 
far from being in its favor. My opponent says, that " one 



OBJECTIONS ANSWEREB. 139 

hundred and thirty two Greek Manuscripts have been ex- 
amined by the learned," in the various ages of Christian- 
ity, " with a particular reference to" the text in debate, 
" and have all been found silent," in respect to it. This 
is something unfavorable to its authority. He says like- 
wise, that there are one hundred and nine such manuscripts 
now in being, testifying against its authenticity. These 
things constitute the main objections against the passage 
in controversy. But, if they did not exist, no defence of 
it would be necessary ; for its authority would stand on 
as high ground as any other text in the Bible. The argu- 
ment, that the passage is now given up by all the learned 
in Europe, is not conclusive, even if it were true ; for that 
would only show their opinion on the subject, which may 
be erroneous.- Opinions sometimes prevail extensively, 
from the mere circumstance that they have been introdu- 
ced by men, whose fame is great in the world. It is, how- 
ever, an unsupported assertion. I never have seen a real 
Trinitarian, who would avow himself to be an entire un- 
believer in the genuineness of the text. 

II. We may now proceed to sum up the evidence in 
favor of the text in question ; and in doing it we may 
speak, 

1. Of its internal character. It has been clearly shown 
that the passage in this respect stands fair, and above the 
reach of its adversaries. I have never seen it attacked on 
this ground by any Anti-Trinitarian, before my oppo- 
nent. 

When Mr. Emlyn addressed his petition to both houses 
of convocation in England, in 1715, he did not object to 
the passage on the internal, but on the external evidence of 
its spuriousness. As to internal character, it may justly 
be said, that it is merely a summary declaration of what is 
contained in many other express passages of the divine 
word. 



140 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

The truth of this has been very fully maintained in the 
prosecution of the subject in hand. In one of the prece- 
ding sermons, it was made evident that, " the Father, the 
Son, and die Holy Ghost," have testified in mid from hea- , 
ven ; and that each is supremely divine, and yet but one 
God, is a doctrine accompanied with such evidence, that 
a denial of it is an entire departure from the very founda- 
tion on which the church is built. We must be more than 
distracted, therefore, to doubt of the authenticity of the 
text, on the ground of its internal character. 

No Trinitarian can consistently take such a stand* 
On the internal purity of the passage, we may surely 
repose the highest confidence. We must be convinced 
that three persons in one God, is not a sound and Scriptu- 
ral doctrine, before our minds can be shaken by such ar- 
guments as my opponent has advanced in opposition to 
the internal character of the text in dispute. 

This consideration, however, is not an incontestible 
proof that it is an insertion ; for an interpolation may be a 
correct statement of a divine doctrine. Although the pas- 
sage, as Dr. Doddridge says, " contains an important truth," 
its inspiration ought to be renounced, if it could be proved 
that it was not written by St. John. Unless that can be 
done, we may justly esteem it as a part of the Holy Scrip- 
tures. 

2. We may now go on to sum up the external evidence 
which has been adduced in favor of the text under consid- 
eration. 

If the historical testimony, which has been exhibited in 
the foregoing discourses, is correct, there is no just reason 
for renouncing its authenticity. But the gentleman on 
the other side, has endeavored to shake that in an indirect 
manner. The information and integrity of Mr. Travis, 
however, may be believed, until the opposite of these 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 14l 

things is fairly substantiated. That he was a gentleman of 
sound sense and classical education, very fully appears 
from the perspicuity, force and elegance of his writings. 
It is said by a very learned writer, that he has had " ac- 
cess to the most faithful, and the most credible documents," 
and " given the most enlightened answers to the objections 
of those writers who have distinguished themselves most 
against this contested text." His situation in life placed 
him above suspicion, as to his integrity. To attack an op- 
ponent, in the way that the gentleman in opposition has 
Mr. Travis, betrays the weakness of his cause. We have 
no reason to believe the historical testimony, on which we 
rely in this case, was ever fabricated by Mr. Travis, nor by 
him from whom he is said to have copied. The attempt 
of my opponent, to destroy the historical evidence which 
has been produced by me, is vain. An effort to prove its 
insufficiency, would be far more ingenuous and convin- 
cing. This method of destroying testimony, may be re- 
resorted to on both sides of the question ; and then all cer- 
tainty concerning any historical statements, would be at 
once unsettled. 

After these general remarks, we may proceed to state 
the main things in the historical evidence in favor of the 
text, on which a reliance may be placed. And in doing 
this, 

1. Mention will be made of the quotations of the pas- 
sage by the early fathers of the church. My opponent 
has stated, that the text in view was never quoted earlier 
than the eighth century. The Rev. T. Lindsey, how- 
ever, has acknowledged, that it ivas cited in the fifth cen- 
tury ; and he certainly is one to whom all the other Anti- 
Trinitarians are willing to look up to as their file leader. 
He says, — " The person who first cited this suspected 
verse, as being really written by the apostle "John, was 



142 OBJECTIONS ANSWEREB. 

Vigiilius Tapsensis, a bishop who lived about the end of 
the fifth century." This acknowledgment being against 
the cause in which Mr. Lindsey was enlisted, it is justly 
entitled to our highest confidence. This recent and 
learned Anti-Trintitarian does not mention this matter, as 
a thing of which he entertained any doubt ; for his ex- 
pressions are absolute. This concession, however, is al- 
most a fatal blow to his own interest, as it respects the 
text in debate ; for if it ivas quoted by Vigiilius at the 
close of the fifth century, it must have been in the Sacred 
Manuscripts then, and believed by the church to be an in- 
spired text, long before that time ; or a citation of it must 
have exposed him to detection and contempt. The citation 
of this debated passage must be found in some of his wri- 
tings ; and, if he had an authority for this which was then 
deemed good, the text must be carried back, near or quite 
to the apostolic age. As the majority of Christendom at 
that time must have been Arians, and many of them 
learned men, Vigiilius would have been exposed to shame 
in citing the text, unless he had an authority for it which 
was indisputable. Common sense must say, that Mr. 
Lindsey 7 s concession is one of the worst blows to the op- 
posers of the passage, that could be well given. It clears 
the Church of Rome entirely from my opponent's charge 
of forging the passage. 

It is insinuated however, by Mr. Lindsey, that Vigilliu; 
forged it himself; saying, that he is " the same person, 
who, most probably, forged the creed, which goes about 
under the name of Athanasius." This retreat is the best 
that he could make from the position he had taken. Mr. 
Lindsey, however, has contradicted my opponent, by 
placing the first use of the text, three hundred years be- 
yond his statement, which was made in unqualified terms. 
Seeing that men of the same school disagree with each 



OBJECTIONS ANSWEREB. 143 

other, we may be justified in thinking, that other writers 
may be right in differing from them all. In the historical 
testimony which I have adduced in defence of the text, 
Vigillius was mentioned ; and it is supported, we see, by 
high Anti- Trinitarian authority. We may venture to be- 
lieve, therefore, that it was quoted also by Jerom, in the 
beginning of the fifth century — by Agustine in the fourth 
—by his cotemporaries, Marcus Celedensis and Phebadius 
—-by Cyprian and Tertullian in the third — and by Cle- 
mens, in the second century. We may rely on this evi- 
dence, until it can be removed by solid proof. 

2. The ancient versions in which the text appears, tes- 
tify in its favor. These are, the Italic, which was made 
in the first century — the Armenian version, which history 
says was made very early, and from Greek manuscripts— 
the Vulgate, or Latin version, in which my opponent him- 
self acknowledges, the text appears. In regard to the 
Syrian version, it is admitted by Mr. Lindsey, to be in 
some of its printed editions. That is a very great con- 
cession for him to make. 

3. The Greek manuscripts in which the text has ap- 
peared, are highly in its favor. Notwithstanding their 
not existing at present, we have authentic documents of 
their having been examined, and found containing the text 
in question. It has been shewn, that Laurentius Valla 
obtained seven Greek manuscripts, in the fourteenth cen- 
tury; and we have his testimony, that the text was in 
them all. Robert Stephens found it in nine of his sixteen 
Greek manuscripts. Jerom formed his Testament in the 
fourth century, from Greek manuscripts. Walafrid Stra- 
bo, formed his Giossa Ordinaria in the ninth century, from 
Greek manuscripts. In making the Armenian version, 
they had Greek manuscripts; and so had the divines, who 
made what is called the Correctorium in the eighth century, 



144 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 

Thus we have a correct historical account of Greek man- 
uscripts, from the fourth, down to the fifteenth century. 
These various accounts of Greek manuscripts, containing 
the text, through the duration of a thousand years, shews 
that the number of them must "have been very considera- 
ble. Although they have perished with time, we have an 
evidence of their examination, that is as great as many 
other historical facts, on whose truth we fully rely. 

As the substance of the evidence for and against the 
text in debate, has now been concisely stated ; we may 
proceed to the intended reflections on the subject. And, 

1. It must be admitted, that the passage in controversy 
is, in some degree, involved in difficulty. Not having 
been more frequently quoted by the ancient fathers — not 
appearing in a number of the ancient versions- — not being 
found in the existing Greek manuscripts, is the sum of the 
evidence that lies against it. Its having been quoted by 
some of the fathers, from the fifth up to the second century 
— appearing in several of the early versions of the scrip- 
tures — the historical account we have of its existing in 
many Greek manuscripts which have been examined, but 
lost with time ; with the purity of its internal character, 
are the testimonies which we have in its favor. These are 
the grounds on which we must judge of its spuriousness 
or authenticity. Thus, the substance of the evidence for 
and against it, is placed in a concise and clear light. It 
must be admitted that the passage is either spurious or 
genuine. If it be an inspired text, its adversaries must 
have, by some means, banished it from many of the ver- 
sions and manuscripts of the Scriptures; and, if it is a 
spurious passage, the Orthodox must have, forged it, ante- 
cedent to the close of the fifth century. But how either 
of these things could have been done, without plain evi- 
dence of the fact, is truly mysterious. There is no hint, 



I 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 145 

of this kind, given by any writer, that I know of, but 
Jerom. He was a pre-eminent character in the Orthodox 
Church, m the fourth century. He says, " that he found 
out how it had been adulterated, mistranslated and omit- 
ted, on purpose to elude the truth." But we know of no 
ancient charge against the Orthodox, as having forged the 
tex,t in question. This has been alledged since the fif- 
teenth century. If, however, the text be a forgery, the 
crime must have been committed about the beginning of 
the Arian period ; and, therefore, it is surprising that they 
should be so silent in respect to the thing ; leaving it to be 
announced by the modern Anti-Trinitarians. But there 
are three considerations about this case, which claim a 
serious attention: — The first is, Which was the most easy- 
thing, to forge and insert, or to erase and omit ? The se- 
cond is — Which of those contending parties, had the great- 
est need of doing the one or the other of these crimes ? 
The third is — Which of those parties possessed a charac- 
ter, that would lead to the greatest suspicion? 

The proper answer to these solemn questions is left to 
the hearer. There must have been iniquity committed in 
relation to the text, either in the fourth or the fifth century ; 
for to make it a matter of more modern date, is an idle at- 
tempt, as the Rev Mr. Lindsey's concession fully proves. 

2, From a careful view of the grounds of this contro- 
versy, my mind is greatly convinced, that the text under 
consideration is genuine. But it is so much involved in 
suspicion, that those who do not believe in Trinitarian doc- 
trine, will repel its force on that ground, whenever it is 
used against them. For this reason, the Rev. R. Ward- 
law, and some others, have not availed themselves of its 
assistance, in defence of the Trinity, and the Deity of 
Christ. In this matter, however, I must think, with the 
Rev. Mr. Bell of Glasgow, Scotland, that they have "con- 



146 OBJECTIONS ANSWERE®. 

ceded too far to the common enemy." As it is retained m 
all the modern translations and editions of the Bible, it 
may be quoted with propriety, whether the Anti-Trinita- 
rians " will hear or forbear." I shall draw this subject to 
a close, with a greatly increased conviction of its divine 
authority. But the effect of my investigation on the minds 
of others, time must determine. 

3. I have not contended for this passage, on the ground 
that the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity, and the Deity of 
Christ, cannot be maintained without its aid. The text 
has been defended by me, from a solemn conviction that 
the Orthodox owe it this service, . as bearing such visible 
marks of being the real word of God. Mr. Wardlaw 
has fully substantiated the truths which have been men- 
tioned, without the help of this passage. If all the false 
readings which are charged on our translation, and the 
forced constructions of the Anti-Trinitarians on the re- 
ceived text, should be admitted, the Trinitarian doctrines 
W T ould then be fully supported. There is no getting rid 
of them, without removing the Scriptures altogether. 
Our opponents have been so powerfully convinced of this 
themselves, that they have been forced to deny the plen- 
ary inspiration of the Scriptures; and to charge the pro- 
phets and apostles, with " lame accounts, and inconclusive 
reasonings." 

4. As this is the ninth discourse on the text, it is unne- 
cessary to proceed any farther. If my opponent makes 
any reply, I shall not answer, unless the cause of truth 
requires it. It is not my wish to excite unpleasant feel- 
ings in his mind, unnecessarily. I have no personal hard- 
ness against the gentleman ; and I do not complain of his 
treatment of me : it has been polite and affectionate in 
many respects. He has taken a deep interest in the sub- 
ject ; and my own feelings, I readily acknowledge, hava 



OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 147 

been strongly enlisted in the cause. I shall close the dis- 
pute, for the present, with freely overlooking some of his 
strong expressions, as things, prompted by the heat of ar- 
gument, and not as being expressive of any disrespect to 
me. I sincerely wish him every necessary blessing in time 
and eternity. It is my ardent prayer, that the subject 
which we have contested, may be proiitable to us and to 
©ur hearers. 

In respect to learning and strength of argument, the 
gentleman stands on elevated ground. I have not suppo- 
sed that I have been contending with a weak opponent. 
Any of my expressions, that may seem to border on se- 
verity, the apology which I have made for him, I offer for 
myself. 

If I have not understood my opponent, or have misrep- 
resented his arguments, I stand ready to be corrected ; but 
as for the conclusiveness of my reasoning, it must be left 
to the judgment of the impartial examiner. I sincerely 
hope, that the gentleman will reconsider the sentirnents 
which he has been defending; and follow the example of 
the celebrated Dr. Scott in relinquishing them. If ever 
he should be so happy as to take that ground, his views of 
the text in question, will probably become the same as his. 

Let the subject induce you all, my hearers, to read and 
think, and be the means of your improvement hV Chris- 
tian knowledge. On the next occasion, it is my design to 
deliver a sermon from Rev. 2. 8, giving it a bearing on the 
subject that has. now been handled. 

May the blessing of " the Father, the Son, and the Holy 
Ghost;" "the three heavenly witnesses," mysteriously 
united in one essence, lead this assembly into the know- 
ledge of God's glory, and a participation of eternal sal- 
vation, on the ground of the atonement, and the Spirit's 
operation. Amen, 



SERMON X. 



Rev. ii. 8, 

These things saith the first and the last, which was dead 
and is alive. 



On the last occasion, a promise was made of entering 
into an investigation of these words. It is now designed 
to give them a bearing on the subject to which your at- 
tention has been so particularly called. It was the vindi- 
cation of a text contained in all the modern translations 
and editions of the Bible, whose authenticity has been 
called in question by the Anti-Trinitarians, for the space 
of three hundred years. Every objection which ingenu- 
ity could invent, or industry spread, has been set against 
it in battle array. 

The circumstance of its being left out of Griesbach ? s 
Testament, is triumphantly proclaimed as a conclusive 
testimony against its divine authority. Seeing that Bib- 
lical critic is gloried in as an authority, almost in all cases 
militating against us ; I may now address our opponents 
in the same manner that Festus did St. Paul ; namely, 
" Have you appealed unto Griesbach ? Unto Griesbach 
shall you go." The text which is selected as the, theme 
of this discourse, stands in his corrected Testament, just 
as it appears in our translation. No manuscript — no ver- 
sion—no circumstance whatever, can be consistently urged 



THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST PROVED, &C 149 

against its divine authority. We have the highest evi- 
dence that it stood in the autograph of St. John, just as 
it appears in the English translation of the New-Testa- 
ment. No enemy dares lift his voice against it, who is 
willing to admit that any part of the Scriptures is the 
fruit of divine inspiration. The passage, therefore, is a 
powerful witness of the doctrine which it contains. 

It was spoken by Jesus Christ; and it is a just descrip- 
tion of his glorious Person. When he appeared to St. 
John on the isle of Patmos, he said to him, " Unto the 
angel of the church in Smyrna write ; These things saith 
the First and the Last, which was dead and is alive." 

The things which are mentioned in this verse, can ap- 
ply to no other being but Him, who is emphatically " the 
Son of God," and " the Son of man." There is no other 
who was dead and is now alive, who can be called " the 
First and the Last." 

Enoch and Elijah are now alive in the highest sense of 
the word ; but they were never dead. The saints who 
arose at the time of Christ's resurrection, are also alive ; 
but, it cannot be said of any one of them, that he is " the first: 
and the last." Some have been raised from the dead by 
the prophets, by Jesus Christ and by the apostles; but, 
they all died again ; and, therefore, it cannot be said now? 
that any one of them is alive in body and soul. The dec- 
laration made in our text, applies only to Emanuel, who is 
" God with us." " The first and the last" are titles, ap- 
plying to no other being but the infinite and eternal 
God. It is in this high sense that Jesus speaks of him- 
self in the text; for he is not comparing himself with any 
created being. 

The passage is paraphrased by Dr. Doddridge thus ;— * 
*' These things saith" " that glorious and divine Person, 
who having assumed the human nature into a union with 



150 THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 

Deity, is able to say, he was dead and is alive ; who, there- 
fore, demands by all considerations of reverence, gratitude, 
and love, thy most attentive audience, and most obedient 
regard." 

The same glories, which this text mentions, are given 
to Christ in Rev. 1. 8, and also in the 11th verse; but, 
as the first passage is applied by our opponents to the Fa- 
ther, and the second is not in the Greek manuscripts, and 
is given up by Griesbach as a spurious reading ; I have 
chosen the eighth verse of the second chapter for my text 
at this time; because no objections can be made to its au- 
thenticity. It is as full in its testimony to our Lord's su- 
preme Deity, as the other passages that I have passed by; 
or as any text in the New-Testament can possibly be. 
The words before us shall now be considered as a solemn 
declaration of the Supreme Divinity of our Lord Jesus 
Christ. After this proposition shall have been proved 
and illustrated, the text will be applied to the passages 
whose authenticity is contested by our adversaries. 

I. It is to be shewn, that the text in view is an express 
and solemn declaration of the Supreme Deity of Christ. 
No other sense can be consistently given to these expres- 
sions— " The first and the last." If Jesus Christ be the 
first, then we may rest assured, that there was no other 
being before Him : and if He be the last, no other being 
can succeed Him, or live when He is no more. It may 
be truly said of Him, as it is of the Almighty — " Thou 
art from everlasting, to everlasting : and thy dominion en- 
dureth throughout all generations." Saying that Christ 
is " the first and the last" is roundly asserting the proper 
eternity of His existence. The Almighty speaks repeat- 
edly of himself in the same manner. He saith — " Heark- 
en unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called ; I am he ; I 
am the first, I also am the last." Isa. 47. 12. "I am 



PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 151 

the first, and I am the last; and besides me there is no 
God." Chap. 44. 6. No prophet — no apostle — no mere 
creature except Christ, if he be one, ever said, " I am the 
first and the last; I am he that liveth, and was dead; and 
behold, I am alive forevermore, Amen ; and have the keys 
of hell and of death." Rev. 1. 18. This is a similar dec- 
laration to the one contained in our text; being only a 
little more amplified. Should any created being express 
himself in our hearing in such a manner, we certainly 
should be as greatly shocked as the Jews were, when Je- 
sus said in their hearing—' 4 1 and my Father are one" 

Rev. 1. 17, 18, is a little varied by Griesbach in phra- 
seology and punctuation ; but its sense is completely re- 
tained. As the passage has an important relation to the 
subject in hand; it will now be stated as it appears in his 
Greek Testament. He makes it read -thus- — " I am the 
first and the last, and the living one : and I was dead ; and 
behold, I am alive forevermore, Amen ; and have the keys 
of hell and of death." Allowing this to be the most cor- 
rect reading of the text, it is as fully in our favor as the 
English translation. It is on these words — "The first 
and the last," that my reliance is placed; and they are 
completely retained by Griesbach, with such expressions, 
as sufficiently show that they are spoken of Jesus Christ. 
" The first and the last," denote a proper eternity, and 
involve the idea of self existence and independence, which 
things cannot be said of any other being, but the Supreme 
God. There is not a circumstance in the text, which is 
the theme of this discourse, nor in the parallel one that 
has been quoted, that goes to show r , that we may under- 
stand the expressions — " The first and the last" with 
any limitation, or in any sense different from Isa. 44. 6, 
and 48. 12. In Rev. 22. 13, Christ repeats the eternity 
@f his own existence three times; saying, " I am Alpha 



152 THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 

and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the 
last." The authenticity of this passage is not called in 
question ; neither can its application to the Son of God 
be very easily denied. The same Being saith in the prece- 
ding verse — " Behold, I come quickly ; and my reward 
is with me, to give every man according as his works shall 
be." We know that it is Christ, who shall descend from 
heaven and judge angels and men. This might be pro- 
ved from many direct testimonies. It is impossible that 
such expressions should be so repeatedly applied to Jesus 
Christ, unless he is like his Father, " from everlasting to 
everlasting." 

The proper Divinity of the Redeemer, might be proved 
from many other testimonies ; but as the text leads us only 
to this, no other arguments, at present, will be urged. This 
as completely settles the point in view, as an exhibition of 
all the evidence which arises from other considerations. 
God only is the "first" of all beings; and, if Christ be 
the "first," then He is truly God. The eternity of his 
being, and consequently, Deity, have been amply supported 
from our text, and the parallel passages which have been 
mentioned. 

To show, however, that the proper Divinity of Christ is 
not confined to the book of Revelation, some other sacred 
passages will be added, which are corroborative of the 
same glorious doctrine. Long before He appeared in the 
flesh, a prophetic voice proclaimed,—" Unto us a child is 
born, unto us a Son is given: and the government shall 
be upon his shoulder : and his name shall be called, Won- 
derful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting Fa- 
ther, the Prince of Peace." Isa. 9. 6. No candid mind 
can have any doubt, but that Christ is the one, who is 
meant in this sublime passage. The thing is irresistibly 
evident. In connection with the other things which are 



PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 158 

said of Christ in this passage, the eternity of his being is 
expressly announced, by calling him — " The everlasting 
Father." It is also said of Him by another prophet — 
" But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little 
among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall He 
come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel ; whose 
goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting" 
Mic. 5. 2. Coming out of Bethlehem, and ruling in Is- 
rael, clearly show, that the sacred writer is speaking of 
Christ ; and his eternity is declared in these words, 
" whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlas- 
ting" Nothing more is necessary to convince the mind 
that this passage is in point, in relation to the present 
subject. 

But, a few passages will be selected from the New-Tes- 
tament, as a farther establishment and illustration of the 
doctrine under consideration. It is said by an apostle — 
" But unto the Son, he saitii — Thy throne, O God, is 
forever and ever." Heb. 1.8. It is necessary to apprise 
you, however, my hearers, how the modem Anti-Trinita- 
rians render this text, to silence its voice against their sys- 
tem. They give it this reading-—" God is thy throne for 
ever and ever." In respect to this, Dr. Doddridge says, 
" To render this as some do, ' God is thy throne forever 
and ever;' that is, God will establish thy throne, appears 
to me very unnatural." But Dr. Carpenter, who is a lead- 
ing Anti-Trinitarian in England, has given op this render- 
ings as being inconsistent with the Greek idiom. Whether 
the other writers of that school will have the temerity to 
advocate it still, time must determine. We may rest satis- 
fied, however, that our translation is correct in this case ; 
and that the passage fully establishes the eternal Deity of 
Jesus Christ. Wetstein, who is also an An-Trinitariam 

k freely acknowledges that " the sacred writer has Gdlhi 



154 THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 

Christ, in this passage, by the name of God." No doubt 
he has done it with strict propriety. The text under con- 
sideration, expressly proves the eternity of Christ's exis- 
tence ; and that is the simple point to which it is now ap- 
plied. In relation to the proposition we are establishing, 
these words apply — " Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, 
and to-day, and forever." Heb. 13. 8. If this language 
were used in respect to the acknowledged God, nobody 
would hesitate about the propriety of the application ; nor 
doubt, that the words denoted a proper eternity. We may 
therefore consider them as being a cogent proof that Jesus 
Christ is "the first and the last" It must also be allowed 
that Melchizedeck is either Christ himself, or an eminent 
type of his Person and character ; and it is expressly said of 
him, that he " is King of peace ; without Father, and 
without mother, without descent, having neither beginning 
of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of 
God ; abideth a Priest continually." Heb. 7. 2, 3. On 
the evidence which has been adduced, we may rest assured, 
that Christ is from eternity ; and of course, the Supreme 
JEHOVAH— the God of the universe. 

II. The text, as thus explained, is now to be applied to 
the passages which are contested by our theological ad- 
versaries. In doing this, let it be observed, 

1. If Christ is " the first and the last — was dead and is 
alive ;" then we may infer, that his divine and human na- 
ture form one identical person. It is as God, that He is 
" the first and the last ;" and it is as man, that He " was 
dead and is" now " alive." These things are all predica- 
ted of one and the same person. 

The mystery of the hypostatical union, as it is called by 
divines, is established by our subject beyond contradiction. 
Our incapacity of explaining it, is no proper reason why 
we should refuse to receive it as an article of our faith, 



PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 156 

To take such an imperious stand, is wicked, and leads to 
broad infidelity. It is the very same thing as to fall on the 
stumbling stone. It is said of such people, that they " shall 
be broken ;" and that, if this stone " fall" upon them, 
" it will grind them to powder." It is sufficient for us to 
know, that God saith the thing is so, without our ar- 
rogantly calling upon him to explain to our feeble under- 
standing the mode of it. To be wise above what is writ- 
ten, is nothing short of opposition to God. The union of 
the divine and human nature in the person of Christ, is a 
sublime mystery, into which the very angels desire to look, 
and which eternity will never fully unfold. It is a bright 
display of God's glory — the only foundation of safety to 
penitent sinners ; and a subject that demands eternal praise 
from men. 

2. If Christ is " the first and the last — was "dead and is 
now alive, then we may infer, that he is a distinct Person 
from the Father, and yet one with him in essence, perfec- 
tions and glory. It is never said of the Father, that He 
"liveth and was dead ;" and no being but God, can be 
'" the first and the last ;" and, therefore, these divine per- 
sons must be one in essence. This deeply interesting 
truth was declared by the Redeemer himself, " I and my Fa- 
ther are oneP John 10. 80. u He that hath seen me, 
hath seen the Father" " I am in the Father, and the Fa- 
ther in me." Chap. 14. 9, 10. There may be dif- 
ferent divine Persons ; but there can be no more than one 
God. 

3. If Christ be " the first and the last, and yet a distinct 
Person from the Father, then we may infer, that the Holy 
Ghost may likewise be a distinct Person in the Godhead. 
Those who admit the supreme divinity of Christ, and His 
distinct Personality, will never dispute this point. No 
such inconsistent person was ever known in any generation, 



I5G THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 

It must be allowed, that every argument in favor of the 
Deity of Christ, is an equal proof of the Trinity in Unity. 
This doctrine irresistibly includes the personality and su- 
preme divinity of the Holy Spirit. As the holy Scriptures 
abound with evidence in favor of the proper Deity of the 
Spirit, the same arguments evince the supreme Divinity of 
Christ. When we take into view the different classes of 
testimony, they form a vast weight of evidence in favor of 
the whole Trinitarian system. A Triune God is the ob- 
ject of real faith, the foundation of solid hope, and the true 
ground of holy consolation to the followers of " the Lamb 
— who taketh away the sins of the world." In renoun- 
cing the belief of a Trinity of Persons in God, we close 
against ourselves the door of eternal life. It is an indis- 
pensible duty, therefore, to " contend earnestly for the 
faith which was once delivered to the saints." Notwith- 
standing the great subtility, and unwearied exertions of 
our opponents in relation to these grand truths of the gos- 
pel, we feel that our feet stand on ground that cannot be 
shaken. The Lord of hosts has defended this ground in 
all ages, and he will continue to vindicate it to the close of 
time. His church is built upon " the rock of ages," and 
we have his glorious promise, that " the gates of hell shall 
never prevail against it." * 

4. If Christ is " the first and the last," and yet a dis- 
tinct Person in the Divine Essence, then we may infer, 
that applying Rev. 1. 8, to the Father, and urging the spu- 
riousness of these words in the 11th verse, " I am Alpha 
and Omega, the first and the last," answers no valuable 
purpose ; for, independently of these proofs, the supreme 
Deity of Christ is fully established, in the sacred writings* 
It is settled by the very same kind of testimony which 
these rejected passages furnish ; and, therefore, the re- 
jection of them amounts to nothing. We have no rea~ 



PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 157 

son, however, to doubt, but that Rev. 1. 8, ought to be ap- 
plied to Jesus Christ ; neither have we any reason to be- 
lieve, that any part of the 11th verse is an interpolation. 
There is a part of it, indeed, not contained in the Greek 
manuscripts ; and, therefore, Griesbach has left it out of 
his Testament ; but the probable cause of this defect has 
been largely shown. When we take into view the nature 
of St. John's composition in his Apocalypse, this deficien- 
cy gives the 1 lth verse of the 1st chap, a very bad — a very 
mutilated appearance. As the Arians applied the eighth 
verse to the Father, no doubt, they clearly saw, that the 
11th verse must be applied to the Son ; and that, if it re- 
mained in the form in which it appears in our translation, 
nothing would be gained by their application of the eighth 
verse ; and, therefore, to alter it, became necessary. If 
wicked hands have not been laid on that, verse, I am ful- 
ly satisfied, that its mutilated state* in the Greek manu- 
scripts, must have been the effect of carelessness in the 
transcribers. But happily for the cause of truth, the 17th 
and 18th verses, in their present form, prove all that could 
be supported by the 11th verse. The eighth verse of the 
second chapter, and the thirteenth verse of the twenty sec- 
ond chapter, fully establish the doctrine in debate ; and 
they have complete evidence of their authenticity. 

" Alpha and Omega," are only one way of expressing 
" the first and the last" and this phraseology remains in 
the 13th verse of the 22d chapter. The text on which this 
discourse is founded, settles the point which the 1 lth verse, 
as it is in our New-Testament, would support. We have, 
therefore, nothing to fear from the situation of the Greek 
manuscripts, in respect to the Divinity of Christ ; nor from 
the celebrity of Griesbach's Testament, which is only the 
reverberation of their voice. Neither have our opponents 
any solid ground to triumph, on the account of these things* 



158 THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 

Rev. 2. 8, standing in every version and manuscript, sol- 
emnly announces, that "Jesus Christ is the first and the last;" 
and, for this decisive testimony in favor of the foundation 
of our hope, we have reason to bless the Lord. 

5. If Christ is " the first and the last" He " is the true 
God, and eternal life ;" and, therefore, we have nothing to 
fear from the reading which the famous Griesbach gives 
to Acts 20. 28, in his purified Greek Testament. In our 
translation, that text reads thus— " Take heed therefore 
unto yourselves, and to all the flock over the which the 
Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church 
of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." 
The text in this form, is an invincible evidence of the Su- 
preme Deity of Jesus Christ. Our opponents call this 
passage, one of the main pillars of the Trinitarian system ; 
and triumphantly say, that Griesbach has thrown it down. 
What he has done is this— instead of " Feed the church of 
God, which he hath purchased with his own blood," his 
reading is, feed the church of the Lord, &c. This reading, 
however, is very suspicious ; and it is even dpubted by 
some of the Anti-Trinitarians themselves. Mr. Wakefield 
is a sanguine Anti- Trinitarian ; yet, he contends for the 
propriety of the word " God," instead of " the Lord." If 
he felt himself under the necessity of abiding by our trans- 
lation ; surely, we may concur with him in opinion. But 
even allowing Griesbach to be correct in this case ; there 
is nothing gained by our opponents, nor lost on our part. 
Doubtless, it was Jesus Christ, whose blood was shed for 
sin ; and, if he is called " the Lord" instead of " God," in 
Acts 20. 28, our text declares, that he is " the first and the 
last ;" and therefore, He h God, and is so called in other 
parts of Scripture, whose reading cannot be disputed. It 
has been shown that He is called God, in Heb. 1 . 8, and 
that our opponents have been forced to acknowledge it 



PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 159 

He is called by that name in the 1st chap, of John, and 
criticism has been baffled, in attempting to alter its reading. 
" In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with 
God, and the Word was God." He is called the mighty 
God," in Isa. 9. 6, and every effort to vary its reading, has 
proved abortive — mere subterfuge — the expiring groans of 
a wounded system. In Rom. 9. 5, St. Paul says of the 
Israelites — " Whose are the fathers, and of whom as con- 
concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God 
blessed forever." This important passage has often been 
put upon the rack of criticism, to silence its voice ; but 
every attempt has failed ; and its enemies have been obli- 
ged to allow, that it stands fair in the English translation. 
To what has been said, 1 John 5. 20, may be added, 
" And we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus 
Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." To in- 
troduce the word " Lord," into Acts 20. 28, instead of the 
word " God" effects nothing, seeing that Jesus Christ is 
so expressly called God, in the highest sense of the word, 
in so many parts of the Scriptures. As He is " the first 
and the last," his Supreme Deity is sufficiently established. 
6. If Christ is the " the first and the last," then we 
may be assured that He "is the true God;" and, there- 
fore, we have nothing to fear from the reading which 
Griesbach gives to 1 Tim. 3. 16. In our translation, that 
text reads, " Great is the mystery of godliness: God was 
manifest in the flesh." Griesbach makes it read — " Great 
is the mystery of godliness : he w f ho was manifested in 
the flesh." This, the Anti- Trinitarians say, is another 
pillar of the Trinitarian system, which that learned critic 
has cast to the ground. The justice of making the text 
read in this manner, is, however, very questionable. But 
allowing its accuracy, there is very little gained by our 
adversaries; for even on this ground? Christ must be more 



160 THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 

than a mere man. " He who was manifested in the flesh," 
must either be " the true God," or some other pre-existing 
being. The 1st chapter of John's gospel settles this ques- 
tion. There it says- — " The Word was God;" — " and the 
Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we be- 
held his glory." " He, who was manifest in the flesh," 
is called in our text, " the first and the last ;" and, of course, 
He " is the true God." We have nothing, therefore, to 
dread from the situation of the text which we are now 
examining, even if it can be made to appear that Gries- 
bach's reading is perfectly right. But powerful reasons 
might be offered in favor of the English reading, if the 
thing were necessary. Whatever may be the true reading 
of 1 Tim. 3. 16, it is a fact that " Go d was manifest in the 
flesh." As this is a truth, it is a very great evidence in 
favor of the English translation. Those who are in favor 
of a different reading, professra religion that requires it. 

7. If Christ is "the first and the last" then He is the 
true God; and yet a distinct Person from the Father. 

This is a manifestation that there is more than one per- 
son in the essence of JEHOVAH. On this principle, 1. 
John 5. 7, is an exhibition of divine truth. All the argu- 
ments that can be raised against its internal purity, are as 
volatile as air, when it is expanded to the last degree. As 
for the external evidence which lies against it, we have 
great reason to think that it originated in wickedness. 
On this, that excellent commentator, Mr. Pool, says — 
" The text was undoubtedly in the original copies of the 
Scriptures ; and the want of it in the copies where it does 
not appear, must be owing to the want of care in tran- 
scribing, or to a base design." 

The gentleman with whom I have been contending, 
has predicted that " the time is at hand, when 1 John 5. 7, 
frill be banished from our Bibles, and consigned to the 



PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 161 

abodes of annihilation." On the contrary, I believe, that 
it will appear in them to the very end of time. It con- 
tains a doctrine, which beams forth in the Scriptures, like 
the unclouded sun. 

The subject may be closed, with varying a little the last 
sentence of my opponent's discourse — " If any man, after 
being made acquainted with these various facts, now pre- 
sented to him," in relation to the Trinity in Unity — the 
supreme Deity and atonement of Christ — the Personality 
and saving operations of the Holy Ghost, and " is so devoid 
of candor, of modesty, of the sense of shame and the 
love of truth, as to rely upon" the baseless fabric of Anti- 
Trinitarianism for acceptance with God ; "I feel compel- 
led to adopt the language of" inspiration, " and say," he 
is " denying the Lord that bought him, and is thereby 
" bringing upon himself swift destruction." But may the 
Lord Jesus Christ prevent this from being my opponent's 
portion, by turning him to a cordial belief of his perfect 
equality with the Father, through the riches of his grace, 
and by the regenerating power of his Spirit. Amen. 

X 



SERMON XI. 



Acts xiii. 2. 



The Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul, 
for the work whereunto I have called them. 



It is not designed to treat upon the designation of these 
men, to the work of the ministry ; although that is a thing, 
evidently contained in this sacred passage. But my in- 
tention is to speak of Him, by whose authority they were 
sent to preach the gospel, and to administer divine ordi- 
nances. 

This subject will bear directly, and with great weight, 
upon the authenticity of 1 John, 5. 7. The various doc- 
trines of Scripture form one chain ; and like the several parts 
of an arch, contribute to the strength, consistency and 
beauty of the whole. 

The Holy Ghost being a person in the Divine essence, 
of equal eternity, power and glory with the Father and the 
Son, it is highly necessary to exhibit the arguments that 
support this glorious truth. Taking into view the circum- 
stances under which we are placed by Divine Providence, 
it becomes our imperious duty to eontend earnestly for 
the Trinitarian doctrines; for they are the fundamental 
principles of the Christian system. 

The Deity and offices of the Holy Ghost have often 
been exhibited in my discourses in this town ; but these 



THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLT GHOST, &C. 16$ 

things have never been made an entire and distinct subject. 
The, doctrine of the Supreme Divinity and operations of 
the Spirit, is, however, of sufficient magnitude to claim 
such a share of attention. In connection with what our 
minds have been upon for a series of sabbaths, the pre- 
sent subject will be pertinent. 

The distinct personality, and peculiar offices of the Divine 
Spirit, have been flatly denied by many in this place ; and 
fey those, who, on many accounts, have a claim on our es- 
teem. To establish and illustrate these sublime and in- 
teresting truths, will, therefore, be the definite object in 
the discussion of this passage. Your close attention is 
required, while an attempt is made. 

I. To support the Personality of the Holy Ghost. 
This doctrine is fully contained in the text, and expressed 
with force and perspicuity. The Spirit is represented in 
it as commanding, and designating Himself by the per- 
sonal pronouns, 7, and me; saying, "Separate me Barna- 
bas and Saul, for the work whereunto / have called them." 

Our opponents frequently boast, that in the sacred nar- 
rative, called " The Acts of the Apostles," there is an en- 
tire silence in respect to Trinitarian doctrine ; and that the 
whole of that history is formed on the simple principles 
of strict Unitarianism. But the text before us, evidently 
contains that which involves every Trinitarian sentiment. 
Nor is the passage which we have chosen as the present 
theme, a solitary instance of Trinitarianism ; as we might 
easily show, if that were consistent with the present de- 
sign. In our text, the Spirit is called " the Holy Ghost ;" 
and this is the very name which He bears in 1 John 5. 7. 
As our Anti-Trinitarian friends object to this name, it is 
the more necessary that we should insist upon it, and more 
frequently use it, when we speak of the third Person of 
the ever blessed Trinity. 



164 THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLY GHOST 

In respect to this case, the Rev. T. Lindsey says—" We 
should use the word Spirit, instead of Holy Ghost; be- 
cause the latter is calculated to lead uninformed minds 
into the belief, that there is a Person besides the Father, 
ivhois God" How admirably cautious these writers are 
in guarding their readers on all hands, against every idea 
of a Trinity in Unity! But all who are acquainted with 
the Scriptures must know, that " Holy Ghost" is the ap- 
propriate name, by which the Spirit is distinguished from 
" the Father, and the Son." This is very clear from 
the commission which was given to the apostles by our 
Lord himself — viz. " Go, teach all nations, baptizing them 
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost." ' The apostolic benediction, is formed on 
the same distinction of Persons in the Divine essence, and 
the name of Holy Ghost is expressed, viz. " The grace 
of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the 
communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all. Amen." 
But I must not prolong the discourse by citing all the in- 
stances of this kind that might be mentioned. It is very 
surprising that Mr. Lindsey should be so particular in 
guarding his readers against the use of this name, seeing 
it is used between eighty and ninety times in the New 
Testament. If the sacred writers were simple Unitarians, 
they were- very incautious and unguarded in using this 
name so frequently. This peculiar name is highly ex- 
pressive of the Spirit's personality, which is the grand 
point we are now supporting. 

Our theological adversaries, likewise, object to the use 
of the word person, in relation to the Deity, as not being 
scriptural ; but we find it necessary, to avoid circumlocu- 
tion, and to express a thing which we fully believe, and 
deem to be of the last importance in respect to salvation. 

But to proceed with the point, let it be observed, that we 



PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 165 

view the Holy Ghost as being in an important sense distinct 
from the Father and the Son — one possessing mind, agen- 
cy, and properties peculiar to a distinct subsistence, which 
we, for the want of a better expression, call a person. We 
feel ourselves warranted to consider the Spirit in this light; 
and the doctrine is an unspeakable consolation to pious 
minds. He is neither tl|e Father, nor the Son ; and yet, 
He is mentioned in our text as an intelligent agent, pos- 
sessing glorious authority, and to whose service, " Barna- 
bas and Saul" were solemnly appointed by the religious 
rite of ordination. It is useless to plead that the figure 
of speech, called personification, is used here by the in- 
spired historian. It is utterly inadmissible to understand 
it so in this simple unornamented narrative. Figures appear 
very beautiful in poetry, and in the elevated diction of elo- 
quence, and are not calculated to mislead the mind ; but 
there is nothing in the text, nor in its connection, to justify 
such a construction. 

The sacred writer evidently speaks of the Holy Ghost, 
as a distinct agent, and one of equal authority and glory 
with the Father and the Son ; and, therefore, He most be 
of the same Essence ; for there can be no more than one eter- 
nal and Almighty God. The inspired penman had 
the example and authority of Jesus Christ, for speaking of 
the Divine Spirit in this manner. Nothing can be more 
definite on this doctrine, than Christ's parting discourse 
with his disciples, recorded in the 14th, 15th, 16th and 
17th chapters of John. There, in grave, simple, solemn 
and unornamented language, He saith to them-— 6 ' I will 
pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, 
that He may abide with you forever : even the Spirit of 
truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him 
not, neither krioweth Him; but ye know Him, for He 
dwelletfa in you, and shall be in you." And again, in 



186 THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLY GHOST 

chapter 19. 26, the Redeemer saith— " But the Comforter 
who is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my 
name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things 
to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." 
And Jesus adds in the 15th chapter and 26th verse, " But 
when the Comforter is come, whom T will send unto you 
from the Father, even the Spirit^of truth who proceeded! 
from the Father, He shall testify of me." In the 14th 
chapter and 7th verse, Christ saith — "Nevertheless 1 tell 
you the truth ; it is expedient for you that I go away : for 
if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you." 
Our Lord proceeds, in the 13th, 14th and 15th verses, in 
saying — " When He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will 
guide you into all truth : for He shall not speak of Him- 
self; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak: 
and He will show you things to come. He shall glorify 
me : for He shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto 
you. All things that the Father hath are mine ; therefore 
said I, that He shall take of mine, and shall show it unto 
you." 

If the Personality of the Holy Ghost is not established 
by these sayings of Christ, then, no language can convey 
the idea of it, nor prove the doctrine. Certainly, the Lord 
has spoken in the passages which have been cited, as if he 
meant to settle the question forever. The Divine Spirit is 
four times called, " the Comforter;" and He is 13 times 
mentioned by the personal pronouns, He, Him, and Him- 
self: — and He is likewise called, " the Holy Ghost," the 
very name which Mr. Lindsey has cautioned his readers 
not to use. 

The Rev J. Yeates, when he had examined the above 
mentioned passages, in answering his Trinitarian opponent, 
the Rev. R. Wardlaw, felt himself under the necessity of 
acknowledging his embarrassment. It is not an easy mat- 



PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 167 

ter for the most acute disputant to evade or explain away 
such definite expressions, so often repeated. They can 
agree to no other doctrine but a Trinity in Unity ; and, on 
that ground, all is natural, beautiful, and important. 

The above mentioned passages — the apostle's commis- 
sion and benediction — with the words which we have cho- 
sen for our text, sufficiently confirm the doctrine in view, 
if nothing more could be advanced in support of it. As the 
same kind of evidence, however, is extensive — a few pas- 
sages more will be collected, to corroborate the testimo- 
ny which has been advanced. Acts 15. 23. "For it 
seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you 
no greater burden than these necessary things." The 
Rev. R. Wardlaw, says on this passage — •" To speak of 
any thing seeming good, to a mere attribute or operation of 
the Deity, is a great deal more than unnatural : — it is non- 



sense." 



The apostles " were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to 
preach the word in Asia ;" then, " they assayed to go into 
BIthynia ; but the Spirit suffered them not." Acts 16. 6, 
7. Forbidding and preventing, most certainly denote will 
and agency. Such things cannot be consistently said of 
any of the Divine perfections or operations ; for, it is act- 
ing like God Himself. The Personality of the Spirit was, 
undoubtedly, the doctrine which the sacred writers inten- 
ded to communicate, in what has been cited. When Aga- 
bus " took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and 
feet" with it, he " said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, so 
shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this 
girdle, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles." 
Acts 26. 11. When St. Paul's doctrine was rejected by 
the Jews at Rome, he said, " Well spake the Holy Ghost, 
by Esaias the prophet, unto our Fathers". Acts 28. 25, 
On another occasion, he said, " the Holy Ghost witnessed! 



168 THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLY GHOST 

in every city, saying, that bonds and afflictions abide me/" 
Chap. 20. 23. In his first Epistle to Timothy, 4th, 1st, 
he says, " Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the 
latter times some shall depart from the faith." In addition 
to what has been said on the Spirit's Personality, we will 
add these three sacred passages — " Wherefore, as the Ho- 
ly Ghost saith, To-day if ye will hear his voice, harden 
not your hearts." Heb. 3. 7, 8. " He that hath an ear, 
let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches." 
Rev. 3. 22. "But all these worketh that One and the 
selfsame Spirit dividing to every man severally as Hewitt." 
I. Cor. 12. 11. The Personality of the Holy Ghost, ap- 
pears in a very striking light from the Scriptures which 
have been exhibited. He is said to come— to show — to teach — 
to testify — to receive — to hear — to speak — and to comfort his 
people : — and He is distinguished from the Person of the 
F ther, and from the Son, in an explicit and guarded 
manner. Such definite language on this sublime subject, 
is more than sufficient to seal the lips of Anti-Trinitarians 
forever. But if reason must decide in this case ; then, let 
the authority of the Scriptures be denied ; for this doctrine 
is certainly contained in them. To think of supporting a 
system of christianized Deism from the Bible, is really a 
very singular undertaking. 

The Son, and the Holy Ghost, are mentioned as dis- 
tinct persons in Matthew 12. 31, 32. In that passage, 
our Lord saith — " All manner of sin and blasphemy shall 
be forgiven unto men :— but the blasphemy against the 
Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And who- 
soever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall 
be forgiven him :■ — but whosoever speaketh against the 
Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this 
world, neither in the world to come." 

The Spirit must either be a Person in th eEssence of 
God, or else a mode of his operation. But, can it be, that 



I 



PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 169 

$ins against Jehovah may be forgiven, while transgressing 
against one of his perfections is an unpardonable offence ! 
David sinned against God ; yet he received his pardoning 
grace : — and we are told in the passage that has been men- 
tioned above, that sins against the Son may be blotted out. 
It is truly surprising, if it be more heinous to sin against 
a divine influence, than to sin against the very Person of 
God. It is also said in the Scriptures, that our sins grieve 
the Spirit ; but that cannot be literally true, if he be no- 
thing but a mode of Divine operation. The reverse of 
this has, however, been sufficiently established ; and there- 
fore, we shall proceed ; — 

II. To prove the Supreme Deity of the Holy Ghost. 

This will not be denied by those who are willing to al- 
low that He is a distinct Person from the Father and the 
Son. It has been made clearly to appear, that, in His 
Personal capacity, He is neither the one nor the other ; 
and yet, I hope we shall be able to show, that he is truly 
God. This, we will now attempt to prove, from the 
names, perfections, and operations which are ascribed to 
Him in the inspired writings. And, 

1. Some of His glorious names will be mentioned. 

He is called God in the highest sense of that momen- 
tous word. When Peter admonished Ananias for his du- 
plicity, he said — "why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie 
to the Holy Ghost ? — thou hast not lied unto men, but un- 
to God." Acts 5. 3, 4. " God is a Spirit f — and this 
Person in God is called, "the Holy Spirit"— and, "the 
Spirit of God." St. Paul says—" Know ye not that y@ 
are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwel- 
leth in you ?" 1 Cor. 3. 16. And again, he says-—" your 
body is the temple of the Holy Ghost." Chap. 6. 19. In 
the 16th verse he adds, "Ye are the temple of the living 

God : as God hath said — I will dwell m them, apd walk 

Y 



170 THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLY GHOST 

in them ; and I will be their God, and they shall be my 
people," In this passage it appears, that to be the temple 
of the Spirit, and the temple of God, is the same thing ; 
and therefore, it is an incontestible inference, that the 
Spirit is God" The God, who dwells anrf walks in the 
saints, is therefore, the Holy Ghost. The Holy Spirit is 
so joined with the Lord of hosts, as to show that He is 
clothed with the same perfections, authority and glory. 
St. Paid says — " Now the Lord is that Spirit : and where 
the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." 2 Cor. 3. 17. 
It is very evident, that one and the same Person cannot be 
the Lord and the Spirit of the Lord, He is said to be the 
Spirit of the Son as well as of the Father , and, in the or- 
der of his offices, to be directed by them both. On this, 
St. Paul says — " And because ye are Sons, God hath sent 
forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts." Gal. 4. 6, 
Again — " Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, 
he is none of his." Rom. 8. 9. In speaking of the Spirit, 
Christ saith unto his disciples — " Whom the Father will 
send in my name." John 14. 26. Again, Jesus saith of 
the Holy Ghost — " Whom I will send unto you." Chap. 
15. 26. It is unnecessary to say any more on the names 
which the Holy Ghost bears, to show that He is a Person 
in the Divine Essence, of equal eternity, power and glory 
with the Father and the Son. 

2. The proper Deity of the Holy Ghost, appears from 
the infinite perfections which He sustains. 

1 . He is said to be eternal ; or, " from everlasting to ever- 
lasting." This can be said of no other being but JEHOVAH 
Himself; and yet it is equally true of the Holy Ghost. In 
relation to this, St. Paul says — " If the blood of bulls and of 
goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanc- 
tifieth to the purifying of the flesh : — how much more shall 
the blood of Christ, who, through the eternal Spirit, offer- 



PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 171 

ed himself unto God, purge your conscience from dead 
works to serve 4he living God." Heb. 9, 13, 14. If the 
Holy Spirit be eternal, He had no beginning of existence ; 
and therefore he must be the living God. I shall rest the 
whole argument on this single proof: for it is irresistible. 

2. The Supreme Deity of the Holy Ghost appears 
from His omnipresence. Dwelling in heaven, and in every 
saint on the earth at one and the same time, settles this 
point completely. The inspired Psalmist says to God — ■ 
" Whither shall I go from thy Spirit ? or whither shall I 
flee from thy presence ?" The omnipresence of the Holy 
Ghost, is, therefore, completely proved ; and no other ar- 
guments are necessary. Omnipresence is a perfection 
which belongs to no one but the Lord of hosts, who is the 
" first cause and the last end of all things." 

3. The proper Deity of the Holy Ghost appears from 
His omniscience. It is said in the sacred word, that " the 
Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God." 
1 Cor. 2. 10. " The things of God knoweth no man, but 
the Spirit of God." verse 11th. It must surely be admit- 
ted on all hands, that no mere creature can search all things, 
and know all the secrets of the Almighty : — neither can 
these things be said of an attribute, nor of its operation. 
Such things bespeak knowledge and agency. 

As it has been fully shewn that the Holy Ghost is not 
the Father, nor the Son, if such perfections belong to Him, 
they settle the point, that He is a Person in the essence of 
God, and of equal glory, with the other Persons in the 
Deity. The Bible, on any other scheme, is a mass of 
confusion — an inexplicable Book — a Book, calculated to 
mislead its readers — -and has mislead the greater part of 
those into whose hands it has fallen. While it forbids 
idolatry on the pain of the Divine displeasure — threatening 
that sin with unlimited punishment — it has lead the great- 



172 THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLY GHOST 

er part of Christendom into, the very depths of that evil : 
and even such people, as have suffered the most of any on 
the earth, for what they have believed to be the cause of God 
and truth. These are facts which cannot be denied, with- 
out displaying a degree of temerity which baffles a par- 
allel. But on the ground of Trinitarian doctrine, the 
language of the Scriptures is intelligible, harmonious 
and beautiful in the highest degree. Thus we have the 
clearest testimony in the sacred pages, that "the Holy 
Ghost is the third Person in the incomprehensible essence 
of JEHOVAH ; and that He is in all the Divine perfections, 
co-equal with the Father and the Son. The eternity of 
His being— His names — His omnipresence — and His om- 
niscience, completely prove the soul-animating doctrine. 

4. To this overwhelmning evidence in favor of the Su- 
preme Deity of the Holy Ghost, we may add His omni- 
potence. We are expressly informed in the book of Gene- 
sis, that, at the commencement of creation, " The Spirit of 
God moved upon the face of the waters. This is a man- 
ifestation of His creating energy. He displayed His cre- 
ating power in forming the material heavens, as well as the 
earth. Job says of God — " By his Spirit He hath gar- 
nished the heavens." Job 26. 13. In respect to the va- 
rious creatures which move upon the face of the earth, the 
Psalmist saith unto God — " Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, 
they are created." Psalms 104. 30. But more will be 
said on the omnipotence of the Spirit,when we come 
to speak of his peculiar offices. From what has been 
said, however, His proper Deity very fully appears. St. 
Paul speaks in Rom. 15. 19, of the "power of the Spirit 
of God;" and that saying evinces that he is not an opera- 
tion, but an operator. 

5. The Supreme Deity of the Holy Ghost appears from 
His unlimited wisdom. The creation of man was the 






PROVED AND ILLUSTRATED. 173 

result of His council, in union with the Father and the 
Son. On this account God said — "Let us make man, 
in our image, after our likeness :" — and when he had fal- 
len, God said — " Behold the man is become as one of us" 
Gen. 1.26, and 3. 22. 

The Holy Ghost is the acknowledged instructor of 
mankind ; and executing this work is a manifestation of 
His infinite wisdom. A sacred writer asks this question — - 
" He that teacheth man knowledge, shall He not knoiv ?" 
The answer is yes. This is an invincible argument that 
the Holy Ghost possesses the perfection of knowing in an 
infinite degree. 

6. The Supreme Deity of the Holy Ghost appears 
from the sovereignty of His agency on the hearts of men. 
This glorious perfection cannot be ascribed to a mere name, 
or operation of God. In respect to the Spirit's sovereign- 
ty, our Savior saith — " The wind bloweth where it listeth, 
and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell 
whence it cometh, and whither it goeth : so is every one 
that is born of the Spirit." He renews the hearts of 
mankind when and where He pleases, and passes by for- 
ever, whom He will. In the great work of salvation, His 
sovereignty is conspicuous ; and He gives to no one an ac- 
count of His ways. When this doctrine is expressly men- 
tioned, and fairly understood, it fills the hearts of unre- 
newed men with wrath. 

Sovereignty is a divine prerogative ; and, as the Holy 
Ghost evidently possesses it in an unlimited degree, He is 
God — there is no being above Him. In relation to this, 
the prophet Isaiah solemnly asks — " Who hath directed 
the Spirit of the Lord, or being His counsellor hath taught 
Him ? With whom took He counsel, and who instructed 
Him, and taught Him knowledge, and taught Him the 
path of judgement, and shewed to Him the way of un- 



174 THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLY GHOST, &C. 

derstanding ? Behold, the nations are as the drop of a 
bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance ; 
behold He taketh up the Isles as a very little thing. And 
Lebanon is not sufficient to burn, nor the beasts thereof suf- 
ficient for a burnt-offering. All nations before Him are 
as nothing ; and are counted to Him less than nothing and 
vanity." 

The Holy Ghost is evidently the Person the prophet 
has spoken of; and we see that he ascribes to Him the 
perfections of the Supreme Deity. St. Paul, in speaking 
of the various gifts of the Spirit, says- — "But all these 
worketh that one and the self same Spirit, dividing to every 
man severally as He will." The Holy Ghost, therefore, 
is not a mere energy of the Deity — but a proper Person — 
a sovereign ?i independent agent, to whom be glory forever. 
Amen. 



SERMON XII. 

Acts xiii. 2. 

The Holy Ghost said, Seperate me Barnabas and Saul, for 
the work ivhereunto I have called them. 



The Personality and Supreme Deity of the Holy Ghost 
have been fully evinced in the preceding Sermon. I must 
now proceed in showing, 

III. What the peculiar offices are, which he sustains. 

His Almighty power has been clearly proved, in the 
general observations which were made on His creating ope- 
rations. His equality with the Father and the Son, and 
his unity in the same essence, have also been established 
beyond the possibility of a reasonable contradiction. But 
He executes certain offices in the economy of redemption, 
which are peculiar to Himself, which manifest His Deity 
in a very glorious manner. In dwelling on these offices, 
we shall be led to a view of His extraordinary, common 
and gracious operations. It is the prerogative of the Fa- 
ther, to vindicate the rights of the Godhead — the peculiar 
office of the Son to make an atonement for sin, and inter- 
cede for believers ; but it is the special work of the Holy 
Ghost, to prepare men for the service of God on earth ; and 
for eternal glory in heaven. In this arrangement of offi- 
ces, infinite wisdom and benevolence appear in beautiful 



J76 THE OFFICES OF THE HOLY GHOST 

order and harmony. We may, therefore, look up to each 
Person in the Divine essence, as sustaining an important 
part in the stupendous plan and work of salvation. 

This shows the fallacy of that Anti- Trinitarian objec- 
tion, namely : — That our system leads us to view the Fa- 
ther as being void of love — possessing a vindictive and 
cruel character; and to admire the Son and the Holy Ghost, 
as our particular Deliverers from the wrath of this angry 
Person in the Godhead. Such sayings manifest their 
want of knowledge, in relation to that scheme of mercy 
which we believe, and show the probable hostility of their 
heart, to the wonderful plan of redeeming love. 

We can have no such feelings towards the Father as 
they suppose, for it is an essential part of the system which 
we have adopted, to believe that, " God so loved the world, 
that he gave his only begotton Son, that whosoever belie v- 
eth in Him, should not perish, but have everlasting life." 
The Father fully approves of the work of the Son and the 
Holy Spirit, and they cordially approve of His vindication 
of the rights of the Godhead. There is an infinite har- 
mony in their council ; and their operations are expres- 
sions of an equal benevolence. No one Person in God is, 
therefore, entitled to an exclusive share of our worship, or 
esteem. Salvation is the result of the unlimited love, and 
united council and operations, of the eternal and Triune 
JEHOVAH. 

But it is with the offices of the Holy Ghost, that we are, 
at present, especially concerned. As he is a distinct Per- 
son in the Divine essence, it is necessary for us to under- 
stand His character and work — to know that He possesses 
equal eternity, power and glory with the Father and the 
Son, that every one of His operations evince his Supreme 
Deity. And, 

I. His extraordinary agency will be noticed, in the 
great plan of redeeming grace. It was frequently exerted 



STATED AND ILLUSTRATED. 17/ 

in the ancient ages ; but as the Divine design in that case is 
fully answered,it has been long discontinued ; and, probably, 
it will never again be displayed. By this operation of the 
Holy Ghost, miracles were performed, and events predic- 
ted, which have transpired in the past periods of time, and 
will be continually taking place down to the end of the 
world. Such operations were necessary to display the 
glory of God, and to confirm our faith in revealed reli- 
gion. 

It was the power of this Person, in the Divine essence, 
that was displayed in Egypt, in the Red Sea, and in the 
wilderness, in various ways. It was by His operation 
that Moses was inspired to write the first five books of the 
Old Testament; for it is asserted by an apostle, "That 
no prophecy of the Scriptures is of any private interpreta- 
tion. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will 
of man : but holy men of God spake as they were moved 
by the Holy Ghost." 2 Peter. 1. 20, 21. This truth is 
corroborated by St. Paul, in saying, " All Scripture is 
given by inspiration of God." 2 Tim. 3. 16. To be 
" moved by the Holy Ghost," and to be inspired of God, 
are the same thing ; and, therefore, the Supreme Deity of 
the Spirit is irresistibly proved. All the extraordinary 
events which transpired under the ancient dispensation, 
were performed by the power of the Holy Ghost, as His 
peculiar office- work. His operations were also exerted in 
a high degree on the human nature of Jesus Christ, and 
in all the marvellous things which He did in the view of 
men. 

To this fact, John bear record in saying, " I saw the 
Spirit descending like a dove, and it abode upon Him." 
A sacred writer says, " God giveth not the Spirit by meas- 
ure unto Him." The Psalmist, therefore, saith to the 

Son, " God, thy God, hath annointed thee with the oil of 
Z 



178 THE OFFICES OF THE HOLY GHOST 



gladness above thy fellows." Psalms 45. 7. When the 
Pharisees accused our Lord with ejecting devils, by the 
power of Beelzebub, He denied the thing, and told them 
that it was done by the Spirit of God ; saying " If I cast 
out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God 
is come nigh unto you." It was by the supporting power 
of the Divine Spirit, that Jesus passed through the pains 
of death, and rose from the grave. It is, therefore, said 
by the apostle to the Hebrews, that Christ, " Through the 
eternal Spirit, offered Himself without spot unto God." 
St. Peter likewise says, that He was " put to death in the 
flesh, but quickened by the Spirit." 

It is necessary, however, to remark, that the Holy Ghost 
exerted no such influence on Christ, as Pie does on men, 
in regeneration and sanctification. Such effects could not 
take place in Jesus; for He "knew no sin, neither was 
guile found in His mouth." He was " holy, harmless and 
undented, separate from sinners, and made higher than the 
heavens." The Spirit's office, in His case, was to anoint 
Him for His work, and to perform the things which re- 
quire the power of the living God. But although such 
operations were the peculiar office work of the Holy 
Ghost, yet, in a certain sense, they are ascribed to each 
Person in the Godhead, as might easily be proved, if it 
were necessary. 

Those various operations were displays of the power of 
one God, existing in three distinct Persons. This is an 
inexpressible mystery; but it is a well established fact, 
and a broad foundation for the hope of believers. The 
extraordinary gifts with which the apostles, and other 
primitive Christians were endowed, are called " the fruits 
of the Spirit." St. Paul says to the Corinthians, " There 
are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit." As mira- 
cles were effected by the power of God, and by the Spirit? 






STATED AND ILLUSTRATED. 179 

they evince that the apostle considered the Holy Ghost as 
being truly God. In relation to this class of His opera- 
tions, this sacred writer says, " But all these worketh that 
one and the self same Spirit, dividing to every man seve- 
rally as He will." It is also said in the same chapter, 
that " there are diversities of operations, but it is the same 
God who worketh all in all." But it is needless to en- 
large ; for the things which have been mentioned, fully 
prove the Personality and Deity of the Holy Ghost. Al- 
though such operations have ceased, we have sufficient ev- 
idence to believe that they were once exerted ; and their 
importance in the kingdom of Christ was great, and they 
still serve to confirm our minds in the truth of the gospel. 
It must be a great crime, therefore, for us, under such ad- 
vantages, to deny the Personality, Supreme Deity, and 
peculiar offices of the Holy Ghost. It should ever be re- 
membered that there is a possibility of so sinning against 
Him, as to exclude us from pardon " forever." But, 

2. I must proceed to speak of the common operations 
of the Holy Ghost among mankind. They have been 
exerted in every age, and will be continued down to the end 
of time. By the common operations of the Spirit is 
meant, those restraints which are laid on the human* mind 
in regard to sin, and the fears which operate there about a 
future judgment and punishment. It is said in the Scrip- 
tures, that God withheld Abimelech from doing things to 
which his natural disposition prompted him. See Gen. 
20. 6. It is thought by some, that all which is done With 
men in this case, is, to place motives before them, that are 
adapted to restrain them from moral evil. But as the 
hearts of men are in the hand of the Lord, we may be 
assured that they are kept back from many sins which 
they would otherwise commit, by a Divine operation on 
their minds; and that they have many feelings about reli- 



180 THE OFFICES OF^THE HOLY GHOST 

gion, which they would never have, without that Almighty 
energy. The Spirit is said in- the Scriptures to be striving 
with sinners. God, therefore, declared to the Old world, 
" My Spirit shall not always strive with man." Gen. 6. 3. 
This proves that men in that period of time were the sub- 
jects of the common and restraining operations of the 
Holy Ghost. The literal Israel, in every age, have greatly 
withstood this kind of divine influence. This made the 
apostle say to them, " Ye stiff-necked, and uncircumcised 
in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost : as 
your fathers did, so do ye." As this is the general char- 
acter of men, we have that solemn admonition, " Quench 
not the Spirit." Such agency on the human heart, evince 
the Spirit-s Personality and power. As He is restraining 
and awakening mankind in all parts of the earth, at the 
same time, His omnipresence is evident, and his proper Deity 
established. Although such operations differ in their ef- 
fects from those which produce holiness, they are testimo- 
nies of the Supreme Divinity of the Spirit. Producing 
such effects among mankind in every place and age, is, un- 
doubtedly, the peculiar office of the Holy Spirit, and it 
has a direct tendency to promote the scheme of redemp- 
tion. If the wicked were not constantly and every where 
restrained, in a greater or less degree, there would be no 
possibility of living in the world — -the gospel would be ex- 
cluded from the earth, and the conversion of sinners pre- 
vented. But the Divine intention is answered by such op- 
erations ; for if it were the design of God to have them 
produce a saving change in sinners, nothing could hinder 
the event. Almighty power must be invincible. To be- 
lieve differently is highly dishonorable to the character of 
the Lord of hosts, and an indication of pride, false confi- 
dence, and enmity against God. It may be truly said con- 
cerning such people, " Father, forgive them ; for they know 



STATED AND ILLUSTRATED. 181 

not what they do !" The Lord is infinitely jealous of his 
own glory ; and He will not give it to another. 
It is now time to proceed in shewing, 
3. What the gracious operations of the Koly Ghost are. 
It is not meant, however, that the operations which have 
been mentioned, are not gracious acts on the part of God. 
Restraining the unconverted from sin, is a great blessing 
to them, and also to others. In every favor that we re- 
ceive, the Divine Giver is highly gracious. By the gra- 
cious operations of the Holy Ghost, we mean, however, 
that power which produces holiness in the heart, and con- 
forms our lives to the revealed will of God. This is be - 
gun in regeneration, and continued in the work of sancti- 
fication. To effect these things, is evidently the office of 
the Holy Ghost ; and for their accomplishment, we have 
the promise of God. For such effusions of the Spirit, the 
fervent prayers of the church ascend to heaven. To have 
an acquaintance with the Spirit's influence on the heart, 
is an important acquisition. We are, by nature, wholly 
" dead in trespasses and sins ;" and it is hy the power of 
the Holy Ghost, that we are made alive unto God. In 
regeneration, we turn from hating God, to the love of his 
perfections and glory. This change is always instanta- 
neous, and is effected in a sovereign and gracious manner, 
by the energy of the Holy Ghost. To do this. He is sent 
down by the Father and the Son ; and in his saving in- 
fluences, He is fulfilling the eternal purpose of the One, 
applying the atonement of the Other, and executing his 
own peculiar office. As this work is his, it proves that 
He is truly God, which is the grand point in view. This 
doctrine may receive confirmation from the following 
passages, the first of which is, " Except a man be bom of 
the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 
That which is born of the flesh, is flesh ; and that which 



182 THE OFFICES OF THE HOLT GHOST 

is born of the Spirit, is spirit." John 3. 6. The passage 
to be compared with this, is John 1. 12, 13: "But as 
many as received" Christ, " to them gave He power to 
become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his 
name ; which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of 
the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." 

As this birth is effected by the agency of the Holy Ghost, 
and is called being born of God, we cannot but see, that 
the Spirit is God. This supports his Personality and 
Deity, and illustrates his office. That the Spirit, mentioned 
in the 1st of John, is the Holy Ghost, may be evinced from 
Tit. 8. 3, 4, and 5. " For we ourselves were sometimes 
foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and 
pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating 
one another. But after that the kindness and love of God 
our ' Saviour appeared, not by works of righteousness 
which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved 
us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the 
Holy Ghost." This passage settles the present point. It 
proves, beyond the power of ingenuous opposition, that the 
God and the Spirit, by whose operation the hearts of the 
saints have been renewed, is the Holy Ghost. 

In the commission to baptize, and in the^apostle's bene- 
diction, he is distinguished from the Father and the Son, 
with the same clearness of 1 John, 5. 7, notwithstanding 
the opposition which is made to its authenticity. It is by 
the sanctifying operations of this glorious Agent, that 
Christians grow in knowledge and grace. Their very bo- 
dies are called his temples, and it is by his gracious power 
every right feeling is formed in their hearts. This appears 
from these expressive words of an inspired writer, namely : 
" But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffer- 
ing, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance : 
Against such there is no law." la calling these things. 



1 



STATED AND ILLUSTRATED. 183 

u the fruit of the Spirit," the idea communicated is this, 
that they arc all effected by his operation. This is called 
sanctification, to distinguish it from that instantaneous ef- 
fect which is called regeneration. This is likewise ascri- 
bed to God, which proves the Divinity of the Holy Ghost. 
See 1 Thess. 5. 23. " And the very God of peace sancti- 
fy you wholly ; and I pray God your whole spirit, and 
soul, and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of 
our Lord Jesus Christ." We may see, therefore, that the 
sanctifier of men is " the God of peace ;" and that he 
is the Holy Ghost. 

Having fully proved his Personality, Deity, and Offices, 
nothing remains but the 

IMPROVEMENT. 

1. If these points have been fairly supported, it will fol- 
low, that a Trinity of Persons in the Divine essence, is a 
doctrine of the Scriptures. If we admit a plurality in God, 
there can be no difficulty in believing, that it consists in a 
Trinity. In this precise number of divine Persons, there 
has been an universal agreement, in all ages, among all 
classes of people, but the strict Unitarians — those who be- 
lieve that God is one in Person as well as essence. Among 
all others, this harmony will, undoubtedly, be continued 
down to the end of time. This uniformity of sentiment, 
is a manifestation that the doctrine of the Trinity has not 
been fabricated by human art ; for if that had been the 
case, the believers in a plurality of Persons in the Deity, 
would have differed widely in their ideas of the supposed 
number, in such an extensive world, and through such a 
long duration of time. This union of sentiment in rela- 
tion to the doctrine in view, evinces, that it is founded on 
a standard which is more certain in its nature than the vo- 
latile imagination of man. Such an universal consent has 



184 THE OFFICES OF THE HOLY GHOST 

never been witnessed among the Polytheists of the hea- 
then world, in regard to the number of their Gods. This 
fully proves that their schemes are creatures of their own 
imagination, and that our belief is the result of an unerring 
rule. To say, therefore, that a Trinity in Unity is not a 
doctrine of the Scriptures, is as frivolous, as to say that the 
sun does not shine upon us, when it is in its highest altitude, 
and without an interposing cloud between it and the human 
eye. Every passage that relates to the Divinity of Christ, 
Is a proof of the Trinity ; and so is every one that teaches 
us the Personality and the Deity of the Holy Ghost. As 
to this article of our faith, we need not be ashamed ; for we 
may be always prepared to give an answer to every one 
who may be disposed to ask us the reasons of our hope, on 
this ground. 

2. If the Personality, Deity and Offices of the Holy 
Ghost have been fully supported, then it will follow, that 
this subject, with the sermon that preceded it, give a pow- 
erful testimony in favor of the authenticity of 1 John, 5. 7. 
The passages which have been our themes in these discour- 
ses, completely establish the Supreme Divinity of the Son 
and the Holy Ghost, and their equality with the Father* 
The contested passage, only contains in itself what is 
clearly expressed in Rev. 2. 8, and in Acts 13. 2, in con- 
nection with a truth on all hands granted, namely : the 
Personality and Deity of the Father ; and the union of the 
Three in one essence, and their acting in the capacity of dis- 
tinct Witnesses. 

If the Supreme and Eternal Deity of the Son and the 
Holy Ghost have been sufficiently evinced, the union of 
the Three in one essence, cannot be consistently denied ■ 
for the Unity of God is a doctrine fully established in the 
Scriptures. Every thing, therefore, which is contained in 
the compendious text in debate, is clearly revealed in the 



STATED AND ILLUSTRATED. 185 

sacred writings. This being the case, the Trinitarians 
have not been under the necessity, in any age, of forging 
such a passage. If a man be confident that a cause in 
which he is concerned in a court of justice, can be supported 
by sufficient testimony, he will not have recourse to bribe- 
ry, to obtain the addition of false witnesses ; for that would 
injure his cause, instead of supporting it. We may, there- 
fore, be well assured, that the text which has been so power- 
fully controverted, was never forged by any one ; and that it is 
the real word of God. To fabricate this passage to sup- 
port a doctrine, which beams forth from the Scriptures 
like the unclouded sun, Would really be a needless under- 
taking. We have no right to suppose this, unless our op- 
ponents can prove that it was actually done ; and if the 
text under consideration were an interpolation, it would be 
in their power to do the thing. That cause which labors 
the most, has the greatest need of wicked efforts to give it 
plausibility. In relation to the doctrine of the Trinity, and 
the passages which support it, we need not fear. The 
glorious truths of the Trinitarian system will be supported 
and believed, down to the burning day, in defiance of op- 
position. 

3. If the Personality, Deity and Offices of the Holy Ghost 
have been supported, then it will follow, that there is an 
ample foundation in the mysterious mode of the divine ex- 
istence, to save sinners, in a perfect consistency with the 
purest justice. 

This is an unspeakable consolation, and therefore, the te- 
nets which support it, merit a faithful vindication. If God 
were only one in Person as well as essence, he could not 
sustain and execute the offices in which his own glory and 
our salvation are included. His glory could not be dis- 
played, unless there is one in the divine essence to main- 
tain the rights of the Godhead — men could not be saved. 



A 



A. 



186 THE OFFICES OF THE HOLY GHOST, &C. 

unless there is one to atone for sin, and intercede for them 
in heaven ; and that there should be one to form them by 
his operation for holiness and happiness, is equally neces- 
sary. The mystery of a Triune God, is, therefore, a glo- 
rious truth, and it secures to us a consistent way of eternal 
life. 

4. If the Personality, Deity and Offices of the Holy 
Ghost have been supported, then it will follow, that those 
who deny these doctrines, are barring against themselves 
the door of heaven. If God is only one in Person, there 
can be no possibility of our standing before him in Judg- 
ment, unless we shall be able to make it appear, that we 
have always been as holy as the angels of light, or he shall 
consent to approve of sin, and so cover his own glory with 
an eternal shade. If He is not a Trinity in Unity, we 
may, with propriety, abandon ourselves to eternal despair. 
On such ground, annihilation, or endless misery, must be 
our portion. To take any other stand, as the foundation of 
our hope, would be giving up a Redeemer and a Sanctifier, 
forever. If these doctrines are true, God can never save 
one who continues to deny them through life. To contend 
against them is, therefore, the sealing of our souls to an ev- 
erlasting death ! It would be doing the work of the Lord 
deceitfully, to take any other ground in the instruction of 
my hearers. In saying this, I am not conscious of pos- 
sessing any malice towards those people, who differ with 
us in principle. In these great doctrines of the Bible, my 
mind has been fully settled for many years. As it has been 
proved that the Holy Ghost is God, may you all, my hear- 
ers, obtain an experimental acquaintance with this truth, 
through his renewing and sanctifying operations. A me y 



SERMON XIII 



Isaiah viii. 20. 

To the law and to the testimony : if they speak not accor- 
ding to this ivord, it is because there is no light in them. 



A variety of opinions prevail in the world, concerning 
the doctrines that relate to God and eternity, and also 
about the duties which we owe to him, and to each other. 
There is no way of settling these things, unless there is 
an unerring standard to which we may resort. There is a 
great propensity in human nature to decide upon these 
questions by rules unauthorised from above. The hea- 
then world, in all ages, have resorted to gods formed by 
their own hands ; and by their own imagination, for in- 
formation concerning truth and duty. It is therefore said, 
in the verse preceding the text, " They say unto you. 
Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wi- 
zards, that peep, and that mutter. 5 ' Blind prophets, lying 
oracles, and false deities, were the sources on which the 
Pagan world have relied for their knowledge, from the 
commencement of time. But in this era of refinement and 
science, these things are justly discarded by many, who 
refuse to abide by the decisions of a divine standard, as 
much as by the unenlightened heathen. They are con- 
stantly appealing from the Holy Scriptures, to that tribunal 
which they call Reason. Right reason, however, is never 



188 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

in opposition to the word of God. It is not reason, but 
our reasoning, that contradicts that glorious standard, from 
which there is no propriety nor safety in fleeing. 

The excellent Dr. Fuller justly remarks, that " there is a 
great difference between reason and reasoning" The first 
must accord with the reason and fitness of things ; but the 
last may be very fallacious, growing entirely out of our 
depraved feelings. When the reasoning of men is in oppo- 
sition to the Bible, we may justly conclude that it is mere 
sophistry, and a decided testimony of their moral corrup- 
tion, opposition to God, and to his word. It is a consola- 
tion, however, to know that there is a standard of truth 
and duty, on which we may rely ; a rule that is not liable 
to perpetual change, like the capricious imagination of 
men, and the slippery grounds on which their various and 
contradictory opinions appear to rest. In matters of faith 
and practice, we are directed by the Lord of hosts to have 
recourse " to the law and to the testimony." Time need 
not be spent to convince this enlightened auditory, that by 
" the law and the testimony," is meant those inspired wri- 
tings called the Old and the New Testament. When men 
speak in opposition to these Oracles, our text says, " It is 
because there is no light in them." The marginal reading 
is, " There is no morning in them." No ; their hearts 
are as dark as that eternal night which preceded the mor- 
ning of time ; when " the earth was without form, and 
void ; and darkness was upon the face of the deep." In 
the Holy Scriptures, sinners are represented universally as 
being in a state of total moral darkness. A refusal to sub- 
mit to their decisions, is a certain evidence of such a state 
of mind. 

On entering into an investigation of this sacred passage, 
it is designed to show, 

I. That the Holy Scriptures are the only certain standard, 
by which we are to decide on matters of faith and practice. 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 189 

If. The various ways in which our opponents refuse to 
speak according to this rule. And, 

III. The reasons of their resorting to other grounds of 
decision. 

These points are of high importance. Your close at- 
tention, therefore, is required, while an attempt is made to 
support and illustrate them. We are, 

I. To show, that the Holy Scriptures are the only stan- 
dard by which we are to decide on matters of faith and 
practice. In doing this, let it be observed, 

1. That such a standard is really necessary. There are 
many things relating to God and eternity, which w r e could 
never know, without a revelation from on High. The 
situation of the heathen world may teach us that the light 
of nature is not a sufficient guide to the human mind, be- 
clouded with sin, enfeebled by disease, deceived by the 
senses, and incapable of acquiring much information by 
experience, on account of the shortness of life. Even the 
unity of God, which appears to be one of the first princi- 
ples of •reason, has been universally overlooked by man- 
kind, when destitute of divine light. Polytheism, or a be- 
lief in a multiplicity of gods, has prevailed in every Pagan 
land, and through every period of time. If it should be 
said, however, that some of the heathen philosophers did 
believe in the Divine Unity, we may reply, that' some ob- 
lique rays, emitted from that grand source of light, the 
Bible, glanced upon their minds ; and yet they were not 
so confirmed in the doctrine, as to avow and teach it at 
the risque of life, and in opposition to the reigning super- 
stition of the times. In relation to the doctrines of the 
Scriptures in general, they have always been in darkness. 
As to the immortality of the soul, they have rather wished 
it to be true, than really believed the doctrine. They 
were wholly in the dark, how to worship God acceptably? 



190 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

and to obtain his favor ; and some of them have been so 
ingenuous, as to acknowledge the fact. These truths 
might be easily proved from their own writings, if it were 
necessary. The feelings of men are so various, and their 
reasonings so capricious, that no correct standard of truth 
and righteousness could ever have been framed by them. 
Independently of the Holy Scriptures, we should all be in 
an abyss of moral darkness — without God — and without 
hope in the world. We should form no consistent idea of 
the manner of his existence — the moral perfection of his 
nature— the designs of his mind about us — how we should 
serve him-— what we are in relation to immortality ; nei- 
ther could we know whether it would be consistent with 
his glory to save us from sin and eternal misery. 

From these considerations, we may see that a revelation 
of the Divine will is highly necessary for man. If there is 
a criterion of truth on the earth, it must be allowed that it 
is the Bible. It is reasonable to believe, that God would 
make some communications on these subjects to men ; 
and surely, the Scriptures bear the marks of Divinity,above 
every book that can be named. They could not have 
been written by wicked men, for they are directly opposed 
to their feelings and practices ; and good men would never 
have penned a volume of lies, to reform the world, how- 
ever anxious they might have been to effect such a de- 
sirable event. 

But, in addition to these arguments, it may be observed, 
that human ingenuity could never have invented a scheme 
of things, so mysterious, so deep, so extensive, so consis- 
tent with itself, so honorable to God, and so safe and easy 
for a sinful race of beings, in bringing them to God and 
holiness. In the view of these truths, we may clearly see 
that " the world by wisdom knew not God." This is fully 
:d by St. Paul, in his first'Epistle to the Corinthians. 






THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 191 

Convinced of the fact, he exclaims, " Where is the wise ? 
where is the scribe ? where is the dispute* of this world ? 
Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world ? 
For after that, in the wisdom of God, the world by wis- 
dom knew not God, it pleased God, by the foolishness of 
preaching"— that is, by the simplicity of the instrument — 
" to save them that believe." 1 Cor. 1. 20, 21. 

There could be no true preaching, without the Scrip- , 
tures ; and, consequently, no salvation. The necessity of 
them is obvious, therefore, without any farther enlarge- 
ment. In connection with what has been said, it appears, 
2. That the Scriptures profess to be the only standard 
of divine truth. They distinctly claim the sublime cha- 
racter of being the real Oracles of God. If this doctrine 
is not admitted, our text is calculated to deceive the read- 
er. Wherefore shoikl we be required to resort " to the 
law and to the testimony," if that rule is incompetent to 
decide religious questions ? If the plenary inspiration 
of the Scriptures is not true, we can repose no confidence 
in them at all : for they expressly announce this to be a 
fact. One falsehood, therefore, would completely destroy 
their whole authority. In this view of the case, " What 
saith the Scriptures ?" would be an impertinent question. 
But a few passages, which assert the complete inspira- 
tion of the Bible, may now be selected, and presented to 
your view. In 2 Sam. 23. 2, 3, we read, " The Spirit of 
the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue ; 
the God of Israel said, The Rock of Israel spake to me." 
The prophet Isaiah says to the people, " Thus saith the 
Lord." Isa. 43. 1. When the nation of Israel were ge- 
nerally assembled, " Jehosaphat stood and said, Hear me, 
O Judah, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem ; believe in the 
Lord your God, so shall ye be established ; believe his 
prophets, so shall ye prosper." 2 Chron. 20. 20, It is alse 



192 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

said by St. Paul, that " All Scripture is given by inspira- 
tion of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, 
for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the 
man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all 
good works." 2 Tim. 3. 16, 17. In relation to this -mat- 
ter, another apostle says, " Knowing this first, that no pro- 
phecy of the Scriptures is of any private interpretation. 
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man ; 
tmt holy men of God spake as they were moved by the 
Holy Ghost." 2 Pet. 1. 20, 21. St. Paul says again, " If 
any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him 
acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the 
commandments of the Lord." 1 Cor. 14. 37. St. Peter 
says, that in the Epistles of Paul, there are " Some things 
hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and 
unstable, wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, to 
their own destruction." 2 Pet. 3. 16. 

These passages are decided testimonies in favor of the 
full inspiration of the Scriptures. The text which is the 
present theme, goes on the ground that every part of the 
Bible is the fruit of the Spirit, and the only rule of faith 
and practice. Unless this is admitted, we cannot see the 
propriety of saying, "to the law and to the testimony ; 55 
and, " if they speak not according to this word, it is be- 
cause there is no light in them." There is an observation, 
which Christ made himself, that bears directly on the 
point in question, namely, " Search the Scriptures, for in 
them ye think ye have eternal life ; and they are they 
which testify of me." John 5. 39. His direction was al- 
together improper, unless these writings are of divine au- 
thority, and the only criterion of truth and error on all 
religious subjects. Neither could there, on any other 
ground, be truth and- pertinence in that solemn warning, 
" I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the 



THE ONLY STANDARD OP TRUTH. 193 

prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these 
things, God shall add unto him the plagues which are 
written in this book ; and if any man shall take away from 
the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take 
away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy 
city, and from the things which are written in this book." 
Rev. 22. 18, 19. 

This is an alarming declaration, and peculiarly calcula- 
ted to guard us from thinking meanly of the Divine Ora- 
cles, or attempting to deny their entire inspiration. But, 
if that is given up, it can be no great crime to take from 
them such passages as we may deem unreasonable. Dis- 
believing some parts of Scripture, and teaching others to 
do the same, is really taking from the book of God. 
When once any part of its authority is seriously shaken, 
it must fail in having much effect on the human mind. 
We should, therefore, be exceedingly cautious in our con- 
clusions, relative to any passage which is found in that sa- 
cred volume. 

No text should be rejected as spurious, unless there is 
positive evidence of the thing, or because we find it oppo- 
site to the grand doctrines of the Bible. We cannot but 
see, from the passages that have been quoted, that the 
Scriptures do claim for themselves a complete inspiration 
and dominion over the belief of man. Every point that 
is proved by express Scripture, or by fair implication, must 
be considered as divine truth. Those who refuse to be 
convinced by such testimony, may be justly viewed as re- 
jecting the counsel of God, " and of judging themselves 
unworthy of everlasting life." Acts 13. 46, This is an 
alarming situation. 

But to the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures, it is ob- 
jected that St. Paul says in one of his epistles, " But I 
speak this by permission, and not of commandment" 1 
Bb 



194 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

Cor. 7. 6. The ingenious and elegant R. Wardlaw has 
offered some cogent arguments to prove the apostle's inspi- 
ration in this case. It is not, however, necessary to argue 
that point now. Those who wish to enquire into it, are 
referred to that author. 

But allowing that St. Paul denies his being inspired in 
the case that has been mentioned; it proves his belief in 
the full inspiration of all the other Scriptures. If this is 
an exception, there is particular notice given of it. If any 
other part of the Bible was uninspired, we should, undoubt- 
edly, be made acquainted with it likewise. The very 
text, therefore, that is brought forward as an objection, is 
a powerful evidence that the holy Scriptures are a com- 
plete standard, or " Test of truth." In my own mind, 
there is no doubt of the apostle's inspiration in the case in 
question. A fixed standard of doctrine and duty, is abso- 
lutely needed; and that must be either Reason or the 
written Word, We do not wish to condemn reason, but 
we must pronounce it incompetent to decide on many 
things, that are necessary for us to know, in relation to 
eternal salvation. This has been sufficiently proved and 
illustrated. 

3. The Holy Scriptures have been received, in all ages, 
by the Church, as an unerring standard of doctrine and 
duty. 

The Jews have always manifested a high veneration for 
the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and they have been 
peculiarly careful, from time immemorial, to preserve them 
either from being lost or corrupted. The martyr Stephen 
says, They " received the lively Oracles to give unto us." 
Acts 7. 38. In answer to the question, " What advantage 
then hath the Jew ? or what profit is there in circumcis- 
ion ?" St. Paul replies, " Much every way : chiefly be- 
cause that unto them were committed the Oracles of God." 



i 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 195 

Rom. 3. 1,2. It is said in honor of that nation, that they 
" Are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and 
the glory, and the giving of the law, and the service of 
God, and the promises; whose are the Father's, and of 
whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over 
all, God blessed for ever. Amen." Rom. 9. 4, 5. Not- 
withstanding the present infidelity of the Hebrew nation, 
in relation to the Christian religion, they highly venerate 
the Old Testament, and faithfully contend for its plenary 
inspiration. 

Dr. Priestly has addressed- a series of letters to the Jews, 
on account of the congeniality which he supposed to be 
between them and the Anti-Trinitarians, concerning the 
Unity of God in Person as well as essence: — but tho 
hope of converting them to his views of the Old Testa-* 
ment, in relation to its being uninspired, might truly have 
been small. They have never embraced that opinion of 
their Scriptures ; nor is there any probability that they ever 
will. The answer of their celebrated Rabbi, David Levi, 
to the letters that have been mentioned, confirms this re- 
mark. 

The Jews have no dispute with us in regard to the 
plenary inspiration of their own Scriptures; and when 
they shall have the veil of unbelief removed from their 
eyes by divine grace, they will, undoubedly, have an 
equally strong faith in the entire inspiration of the New- 
Testament. 

They put false constructions upon their Scriptures, ta 
evade their evidence in favor of the Divinity of Christ's 
Person and mission ; but they have never shown a disposi- 
tion to deny the complete authority of the Old Testament, in 
relation to doctrine and duty. There is a wide difference, 
therefore, between them and the Anti-Trinitarians, who 
assume the Christian name. We have a hold of the Jews 



m 



THE SCRIPTURES ARE 



in arguing, on the ground of their belief in the full in- 
spiration of the Old Testament, from which our Anti- 
Trinitarian opponents have broken loose. But their de- 
parture from the Scriptures, as a complete standard of di- 
vine truth, will be shown more fully in the sequel of this 
subject. 

The great majority of the Christian world, fully agree 
with the Jews, in relation to the sacredness of the Old 
Testament, and their faith is equally strong, concerning 
the plenary inspiration of the New. This fact very fully 
appears from their public confessions of faith. It is need- 
less to enter into the proof of this, by quotations from their 
numerous standards ; for there is no probability that this 
statement will be denied. Whatever points of difference 
appear, among the various denominations of professing 
Christians, they are generally and happily agreed in this es- 
sential article of faith. It may be justly considered, therefore, 
as a fundamental principle in theology; and a dereliction 
from it, is a complete departure from all that which gives any 
claim to the Christian name. This assertion will readily 
be admitted as correct, by all the visible Churches of our 
Lord, in all parts of the earth. It is, therefore, made with 
unlimited confidence. 

The denial of this, forms a strong resemblance— a near 
relation to avowed deists ; and it lays a broad foundation 
for the adoption of their entire theory, in the progress of 
such a mode of investigation. This is a solemn reflection, 
and well calculated to alarm the mind of an immortal be- 
ing — a being accountable to God. We have great reason 
to doubt the truth of such instructions, and to dread the in- 
fluence of men, who are endeavoring, either openly or se- 
cretly, to unhinge our belief in the entire inspiration of the 
Holy Scriptures. This point must either be admitted, or 
else, to be consistent, we must deny that the Bible is of 






THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 197 

any essential value ; when, it is certainly announced that 
" All Scripture is given by inspiration of God." This is 
either true or false. If it is true, we are bound to believe 
it ; but if not, the whole authority of the writings that are 
called sacred, is at once annihilated. Such a palpable 
falsehood must destroy forever the credibility of any 
testimony. It is incumbent on us to take heed how we 
are led by the reasonings of men, " who lie in wait to de- 
ceive ;" and who are, " with good words and fair speeches," 
corrupting the religious principles a of the simple" and un- 
designing part of mankind. The general agreement of the 
Christian world, in relation to the complete inspiration of 
the Holy Scriptures, is a powerful evidence that this arti- 
cle of faith is true, and founded on irresistible and ample 
testimony. On this head, the agreement of the church has 
been as general, through the course of eighteen hundred 
years, as it is at the present day. A number of my hea- 
rers have solemnly assented to this article of the Christian 
faith, in the presence of God, angels and men. You, my 
brethren, have laid yourselves under high obligation to re- 
sist every temptation to give up this cardinal point in re- 
vealed religion. 

We have reason to fear, lest some of the members of our 
families should be induced to renounce the Trinitarian doc- 
trine, under the peculiar circumstances in which we are 
placed in providence. To guard ourselves and them also, 
from such a catastrophe, is a thing of the last importance. 
Whenever we set aside the complete inspiration of the 
Scriptures, and refuse to acknowledge them as an unerring 
standard of truth ; we are entirely afloat in relation to doc- 
trine, duty and hope. When this ground is taken, our 
own opinion is the only guide. This appears to be the 
case with many, who enjoy the means of being better in- 
informed. They profess to extend charity to all men. 



198 THE SCRIPTURES ARE, &C. 

whom they think sincere, let their religious principles be 
what they may. This is believing that people may honest- 
ly misunderstand the essential truths of the Bible — reject 
them all — yet be sincere, virtuous servants of the Lord, 
and profitable teachers of mankind. But if this is a cor- 
rect sentiment, then, God ought to acknowledge to men? 
that his word is expressed in such an enigmatical manner, 
that he has not given them sufficient abilities to compre- 
hend its meaning. This view of the case, is very inconsis- 
tent with the following divine injunctions, namely, " If 
any man speak, let him speak as the Oracles of God." 
1 Pet. 4. 1 1. "If there come any unto you and bring not 
this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid 
him God speed : for he that biddeth him God speed, is 
partaker of his evil deeds." 2 John, 1.10. " But though 
we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto 
you, than that which we have preached unto you, let him 
be accursed." Gal. 1. 8. Such sayings are very imper- 
tinent and offensive, if the Scriptures are not the only test 
of doctrine and duty. If they are either obscure in their 
meaning, or destitute of divine authority, they cannot be 
sufficient to make us ■" wise unto salvation." ~ The point 
under consideration may, therefore, be viewed as fairly and 
forever settled. Amen. 



SERMON XIV. 



Isaiah viii. 20. 

To the law and to the testimony : if they speak not accor 
ding to this ivord, it is because there is no light in them. 



In the preceding discourse, it has been made to appear, 
that the Holy Scriptures are the only standard of decision 
on matters of faith and practice. In conformity with the 
order adopted, it is to be shown, 

II. What the ways are, in which our opponents refuse 
to speak according to this rule. The Anti- Trinitarians, 
however, are not the only people who depart unwarranta- 
bly from this unerring standard. But there is no other 
sect that I know of, that take an equal liberty with the 
Scriptures ; whose teachers bestow such unwearied pains y 
and employ such learning and talents, to rase them to the 
very foundation. I shall now endeavor to make a short 
and correct statement of the various ways they have adopt- 
ed, to accomplish their designs. And, 

1. They assert, that the following passages, relating to 
the doctrine of the Trinity, and the Deity of Christ, are 
interpolations ; or, to use the words of the Rev. T. Lind- 
sey, " False readings, or alterations of the words of Scrip- 
ture, made with design, or through mistake, before the art 
of printing was invented*" 



200 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

The passages referred to, are these : Acts 20. 28 ; 1 
Cor. 15. 47 ; Eph. 3. 9, 19 ; 1 Tim. 3. 16 ; 1 John 2. 16 ; 
1 John 5. 7, and 5. 20 ; Jude, verse 25 ; Rev. 1.11. 

1 John, 5. 7, is the most vulnerable of any of the pas- 
sages that have been mentioned ; and yet, as we have seen, 
the evidence of its authenticity is great. But the unremit- 
ting efforts of the Anti-Trinitarians to prove the above 
passages to be spurious readings, show the hostility of their 
hearts to the doctrines which they contain, as they stand 
in our translation. The end which they have to answer 
by effecting the death of these Divine witnesses, is such, 
that we may justly stand in doubt of their impartiality as 
Biblical critics. It is not my design, at present, to enter 
into an examination of the merits of the above list of pas- 
sages ; but merely to show the engagedness of our oppo- 
nents to overthrow the doctrines which appear to be " the 
Alpha and Omega" of the Holy Scriptures. They would 
not have bestowed so much labor in trying to prove the 
spuriousness of such parts of Scripture, unless they had 
assumed the opinion previously, that the doctrine of the 
Trinity, the Deity of Christ, the Atonement, and the Per- 
sonality of the Holy Ghost, are unreasonable doctrines. 
Taking this course, however, is not speaking according 
" to the law and the testimony," independent of the pas- 
sages in question. 

But, when the plea of interpolation fails them in sup- 
porting their cause, the next alternative is, 

2. The charge of mistranslation. They have endea- 
vored to place the following list of passages in that pre- 
dicament. I shall place them in the order in which they 
appear in the writings of the Rev. T. Lindsey : — Isa. 9. 6, 
and 53. 8 ; Jer. 23. 6 ; Hos. 1. 7 ; Zech. 12. 10, & 13. 7; 
Matth. 12. 31 ; John 1, to the close of the 14th verse ; 
John 1. 15, & 10. 18; John 3. 18, & 5. 18 ; John 6. 23, 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 201 

and 8. 58 ; John 18. 3, and 17. 24 ; Acts 13. 26, and 4. 
27, 30 ; Acts 3. 14, 15, and 7. 59 ; Acts 9. 14, 21 ; 1 Cor. 
1.2; Acts 18. 29, and 20. 28 ; Rom. 1. 3, 20 ; Rom. 9. 
5 ; 1 Cor. 2. 14, and 10. 9 ; Gal. 4. 7, and 4. 32 ; Col. 2. 
9 ; Phil. 2. 5, 6, 7, 8 ; Heb. 1. 2, 5, 6 ; John 3. 16, 18 ; 
Heb. 1. 8, and 2. 14, 16 ; 1 John 1. 12, 3. 

No trespass, my hearers, shall be committed on your 
patience, by stating the reasons which are assigned for 
varying from our translation, in this list of passages. 
Some of them, however, are very extraordinary. Those 
who desire to see the matter investigated, are cheerfully 
referred to the Sermons of the Rev. R. Wardlaw, on the 
Socinian controversy. A number of the texts stated above, 
are ably defended by that eloquent and learned writer. 
All that I have now in view, is simply to show the perse- 
verance and determination of the Anti-Trinitarian writers, 
in opposing the common doctrines of the Bible. When 
writers set out with the ardent desire of finding interpola- 
tions and mistranslations, we have great reason to be on 
our guard in relation to the result of their researches. No 
man would be willing to venture his life in the hands of a 
juror, if he knew him to be an enemy, whatever good opi- 
nion he might have of the extent of his learning, and the 
soundness of his j udgment. People of reading must know 
that the Anti-Trinitarian authors differ greatly among 
themselves, as well as from other writers, in their criti- 
cisms on, and translations of the Scriptures. But the plea 
of mistranslation is one way in which they are endeavoring 
to effect an escape from Trinitarian doctrines ; and that 
is all that I wish to prove at present. 

In many passages, however, which relate to the doc- 
trines in question, this subterfuge wholly fails them ; and, 
therefore, 

3. They have recourse to the plan of giving any mean- 
C c 



202 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

ing to a text that it will possibly bear, rather than to allow 
it to stand in such a light as would afford support to the 
doctrines they are opposing. They have invented no less 
than five different ways of translating and construing Rom. 
9.5; which reads, in our translation, "Whose are the 
Father's, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ 
came, who is over all, God blessed forever." To enter 
into a view of the different methods they have taken to 
manage this text, is not designed ; for the variety shows 
the difficulty in which they are involved, and their fixed 
determination to escape at any rate. Men who will have 
recourse to such means of defence, cannot be safely fol- 
lowed in their criticisms. Gr ii meaning to a pas- 
sage that it will possil to its literal 
and obvious import, is tafing for i the point in de- 
bate. The thing is not admissible on an v other ground 
but this, that Trinitarian doctrine is an absurdity. It is 
not ve\y ingenuous, however, to claim the victory by beg- 
ging the question. 

It is well understood, that the Anti-Trinitarians, very 
generally, deny the accc hj : the evangelists give of 

the miraculous conception of Jesus Christ. Mr. Wardlaw 
says, this is done, " in defiance of all versions, and of all 
manuscripts, as well as of all the critic?, and among 
rest, Griesbach himself." He adds, "Is it possible 
avoid a suspicion — is it a breach of charity to entertain it 
that there must have been, in the minds of those who re- 
ject these chapters, a secret wish to find them spurious ? 
a predisposition to lend a willing ear to whatever could be 
adduced, with even the remotest semblance of plausibility, 
to bring them into discredit ? 5 ' The fact is this, the chap- 
ters alluded to, cannot be made to accord with the simple 
humanity of Christ ; and, therefore, they must he given up 
at all events If the whole Bible were as express on the 



the 
to 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 203 

subject, as the chapters and passages in question, it would, 
of course, be entirely renounced on this principle. No 
man can prove the doctrines in debate, to people who have 
previously assumed the belief that they are an Impossibility. 
Every thing that appears to support them, must, there 
be removed on some calculation or other. Bu;, surely, 
that is refusing to abide by the decision of the Scriptures, 
and making our own reason the test of truth and falsehood. 

Concerning one of the five ways, which they have in- 
vented, of rendering Rom. 9. 5, Mr. Belsham says, ki This 
conjecture, irgenious, and even probable as it is, not 1 
supported by a single manuscript, version, or aiiti; 
whatever, cannot be ; 3 into the text. But one may 

almost believe that the present readins; might be ov ing to 
an inadvertence in one of • transcribers, if not in 

the apostle's own amonuensi ?c Belsham's Calm 

Enquiry, page 2 

This course is evading an equivocal, but unpleasant text, 
at any rate ! There is no possibility of standing before 
such reasoners ! People who sec the beauty and importance 
of Trinitarian dectriae §, must be greatly shocked in seeing 
such liberty taken with the Oracles of God. But when 
interpolation, mistranslation, f.nd every ether method of 
evasion, fails, our opponents have recoui 

4. To the open denial of the plenary inspiration of the 
Scriptures. This is, confessedly, a strong assertion ; but 
it may be very easily supported, from the express sayings 
of some of the most eminent Anti-Trinitarian authors. It 
is said by St. Paul, that " All Scripture is given by in- 
spiration of God ;" but the reverse of this is boldly main- 
tained by Dr. Priestley, who was one of the most d 
guished Anti- Trinitarians of his age. He says, in his 
letters to a philosophical unbeliever, " Not that I consider 
the books of Scripture as inspired, and on that account 



204 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

entitled to respect. If you wish to know what, in my 
opinion, a Christian is bound to believe with respect to the 
Scriptures, I answer, that the books which are universally 
received as authentic, are to be considered as faithful re- 
cords of past transactions. No Christian is answerable for 
more than this. The writers of Scripture were men, and 
therefore fallible ; but all that we have to do with them, m 
in the character of historians, and witnesses of what they 
heard and saw. Of course, their credibility is to be esti- 
mated like that of other historians, viz. from the circum- 
stances in which they wrote, or with respect to their op- 
portunities of knowing the truth of what they relate, and 
the biases to which they might be subject. Like all other 
historians, they were liable to mistakes ; and with respect 
to their reasoning, we are fully at liberty to judge of it, as 
well as that of any other men, by a due consideration of 
the propositions they advance, and the arguments they 
allege," 

In a communication to Dr. Price, on this subject, he 
says, " Neither I, nor I presume yourself, believe impli- 
citly every thing that is advanced by any writer in the 
Old or New Testament." In relation to all the sacred 
writers, he says to that gentleman, " I believe them to have 
been men', and consequently fallible, and liable to mistake 
with respect to things to which they had not given much 
attention, or concerning which they had not the means of 
exact information ; which I take to be the case with re- 
spect to the account which Moses has given of the creation 
and fall of man." 

In another part of his writings, he charges Moses with 
giving us " a lame account" of these things. Some of the 
British reviewers ascribed this saying concerning Moses, 
to the Dr.'s " magnanimity ;" that is, his independence and 
elevation of mind. That the thing was bold, must be ad- 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 205 

jmitted ; but we think that it was more evincive of moral 
depravity, than of true greatness* 

Dr. Priestley was undoubtedly a man of some learning 
and talents ; but such an attack upon Moses, was a high 
evidence of his infidelity, and no ornament to his charac- 
ter. With all his erudition, study, and mental force, the 
best of his writings fall infinitely beneath the sublimity of 
the Holy Scriptures. The one shows the learned, inge- 
nious, and studious mind ; but the other bears the obvious 
marks of true Divinity, and is a bright display of the moral 
glory of God. There is as wide a difference, therefore, 
between the productions of a Priestley, and the writings of 
Moses, as there is between earth and heaven ! There 
have been many in the world, not inferior to Dr. Priestley 
in any respect, who have differed greatly from him in re- 
lation to the Scriptures ; and, no doubt, it is the case now, 
and will be to the end of time. To speak otherwise, 
would be a manifestation of moral blindness, and insensi- 
bility to the beauty of truth and holiness. 

In direct opposition to the Apostles, Paul and Peter, 
and some of the Prophets, Dr. Priestly has said, " That 
the books of Scripture were written by divine inspiration^ 
is a thing to which the writers themselves make no pre- 
tensions. It is a notion destitute of all proof; and has 
done great injury to the cause of Christianity." But in ad- 
vancing unqualified and daring assertions, in opposition to 
Prophets and Apostles, Dr. Priestly was actually a " mag- 
nanimous" writer ! In his first letter to Mr. Burn, he has 
the temerity to declare, " That in no sense whatever, not 
even in the lowest of all, is Christ so much as called God 
in all the New-Testament." 

On this astonishing assertion, Dr. Fuller makes the fol- 
lowing remarks : " The method taken by this writer, to 
enable him to hazard such an assertion without being sub- 



206 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

ject to the charge of downright falsehood, could be no other 
than that of laying a kind of arrest upon many sacred pas- 
sages, as being either interpolations, or mistranslations, or 
something that shall answer the same end ; and by these 
means, imposing silence upon them as to the subject in dis- 
pute." " To be sure," says the Dr. " we may go on, kil- 
ling one Scripture testimony, and stoning another, till at 
length, it will become an easy thing to assert, that there is 
never an instance in all the New-Testament, in which our 
opinions are confronted. But to what does it all amount ? 
When we are told that " Christ is never so much as called 
God in the New-Testament;" the question is, whether 
we are to understand it of the New- Testament as it was 
left by the sacred writers ; or, as corrected, amended, cur- 
tailed, and interpreted, by a set of controvertists, with a 
view to make it accord with a favorite system." 

It has been made to appear, that Dr. Priestley pointedly 
denies, that the Scriptures are the fruit of divine inspira- 
tion. He viewed them only, " as faithful records of past 
transactions." But, as the writers of the Scriptures de- 
clare that they were inspired, if Dr. Priestley is right, then 
they have told us a palpable falsehood ; and, therefore, 
they cannot be considered as faithful historians, nor even 
as honest men. Viewing the case in this light, it cannot 
be said that the Scriptures are a proper test of truth and 
duty. If the Dr. is correct, they may be summoned to 
answer at the bar of reason; and if they do not approve 
themselves to its decisions, are as liable to be condemned 
as any other writings. It is entirely impertinent on this 
calculation, to exhort any man to go "to the law and to 
the testimony^ to know what he should either do or be- 
lieve. 

Dr.Pricstly, however, is not alone, in such daring attacks 
upon the Holy Scriptures. The Rev. T. Lindsey says, 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 207 

in relation to the Person of Christ, " It must be owned, to 
have been left in obscurity in the Scriptures themselves, 
which might mislead readers, full of heathen prejudices." 
But if the Scriptures are calculated to ': mislead" men, in 
judging of Christ, they are not very well adapted to inform 
them on any other subject ; and, therefore, they must be 
in a great measure useless, unless it be to afford matter for 
religious controversy- A writer in the Monthly Review, 
agrees with Mr. Lindsey in saying, " The nature and de- 
sign of the Scriptures, is not to settle disputed theories, 
nor to decide upon speculative controverted questions, 
even in religion and morality." It must "be acknowledged, 
I think, that this is in fact, a plain denial of the inspiration 
of Scripture, and a rejection of it, as being the proper 
rule of truth and virtue. Another writer of this class, 
says of St. John, " If a concise, abrupt obscurity, incon- 
sistent with itself, and made up of allegories, is tol>e called 
sublimity of speech, I own John to be sublime : for there 
is scarce one discourse of Christ, which is net altogether 
allegorical, and very hard to be understood." But to go 
on, another author of the same stamp says, " I shall not 
a little glory if I shall be found to give some light to 
Paul's darkness? a darkness, as some think, industriously 
affected." Let us hear another of the Anti- Trinitarian 
school, in relation to the historical events of the New- 
Testament, saying, " These narrations, true or false, are 
only suited for ignorant, uncultivated minds, who cannot 
eatejri into the evidence of natural religion." He adds, 
that "Moses, according to the childish conceptions of the 
Jews in his days, paints God as agitated by violent affec- 
tions, partial to one people, and hating ail other nations." 
In a note on 2 Peter, 1. 21. " The prophecy came not in 
old time by the will of man, but holy men of God 
*pake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." It is said 



208 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

by one of these writers, " Peter spake then according t© 
the conceptions of the Jews ; and the prophets may hav© 
delivered the offspring of their own brains as divine reve- 
lations." 

Mr. Blackwall says, concerning these men, " Let any 
of the followers of these worthy interpreters of the gospel, 
and champions of Christianity, speak worse, if they can, 
of the ambiguous oracles of the father of lies." The 
Rev. R. Wardlaw says, "From the views of inspiration, 
which these writers entertain, we are prepared to hear- — for 
it is mournfully consistent — one of them charging the sa- 
cred penman with using language, even on the most impor- 
tant subjects," to which they themselves probably annexed 
no very distinct ideas; "and another accusing the author 
of the admirable epistle to the Hebrews with, "far fetch- 
ed analogies and inconclusive reasonings" Citations of 
of this kind might be multiplied ; but sufficient has been 
saidj to show the spirit of our Anti- Trinitarian opponents? 
and their manner of treating the Holy Scriptures. 

If it should be said, however, that the faults of some 
writers ought not to be charged to the Anti-Trinitarians 
in general ; I answer, let but one of all their writers be 
produced, who has expressly avowed his belief in the ple- 
nary inspiration of the Scriptures, and I will acknowledge 
the propriety of the remark. The statements that have 
been made, are proper samples of the community at large, 
as far as I have been able to extend my observations. 

My authorities, for what I have said, are, Dr. Fuller 
and the Rev. R. Wardlaw — gentlemen, deservedly esteem- 
ed in the Christian world, and whose character, as wri- 
ters ; for information, piety and truth, stand far above im- 
peachment. Unlimited reliance, therefore, may be placed 
on the accuracy of what has been advanced, as the sayings 
«f Anti-Trinitarian authors. In Fuller's Letters, and 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 209 

Wardlaw's Sermons, the books and pages are expressly 
mentioned. My statements, however, will not be dispu- 
ted ; for the thing could not be done with success. 

In the view of what has been said, it amounts to very 
little with our opponents, whether 1 John 5. 7, is a genu- 
ine text, or a forgery ; for they deny the inspiration of 
the whole Book of God ; and, therefore, if that passage 
were proved to have been written by St. John, all that 
they would have to do, would be to suppose that he had 
not given sufficient attention to the subject — was not prop- 
erly informed respecting that doctrine, and that his reason- 
ing is inconclusive. This observation will. apply to every 
passage that they contest, as being either inserted or mis- 
translated. With such conceptions of the Scriptures, it 
must be expected that, they will dispute their authority 
without any fear, whenever they perceive them to be in 
opposition to their preconceived and darling system. 

The opposition which is made in this town, to the doc- 
trines that I have been defending, is very great. The 
youth are exposed to the contagion. They behold the 
controversy ; but the want of years and experience, in- 
capacitate them, in a great measure, to understand its merits. 
No doubt, they have supposed, that each of the contending 
parties were equally willing to abide by the decision -of the 
Bible, in our translation ; and, therefore, I feel myself un- 
der indispensible obligation to give them suitable informa- 
tion on the subject. Supposing that I should, through a 
false delicacy, decline the painful task, and they be left to 
embrace that destructive scheme ; how should I answer it 
to God ! How should I dare to meet them in the world of 
Spirits ! Would this excuse me there, that some of my 
hearers disliked to hear controversy ? No; a cringing, de- 
pendent mind, is infinitely unsuitable for a gospel minister. 
If I know r rav own heart, it is not for victory nor for party 
Dp 



^10 THE SCRIPTURES ARE, &C. 

that I have been contending ; but for truth — the glory of 
God, and the souls of men. " To the law and to the testi- 
mony : if they speak not according to this word, it is be- 
cause there is no light in them." 

The last clause of this passage will be the foundation of 
the next Sermon. Like Timothy may we " know the 
Scriptures ; which are able to make us wise unto salvation, 
through faith that is in Christ Jesus." Amen. 




SERMON XV. 

Isaiah vih. 20. 

To the laiv and to the testimony : if they speak not accor- 
ding to this word, it is because there is no light in them. 



Two discourses have been delivered from this passage 
In the first, it was shown, that the Scriptures are the only 
standard of faith and practice. In the second, the various 
ways were pointed out, in which our Anti- Trinitarian op- 
ponents refuse to speak according to this word. 

In conformity with the general arrangement, it remains, 

III. To show, the reasons of their resorting to other 
grounds of decision. When the text was written, it ap- 
pears that some were disposed to advise the Israelites to 
forsake God — to renounce his word as the only standard 
of truth, and to have recourse to other sources of religious 
information. In opposition to these pernicious instruc- 
tions, the prophet said, " Should not a people seek unto 
their God ? To the law and to the testimony : if they 
speak not according to this word, it is because there is no 
light in them." 

It is, surely, a sinful darkness, that causes people to de- 
part from the light of divine truth. It is a manifestation 
that they have never been born of the Spirit— never con- 
formed to the moral image of God. Men of great minds 



212 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

and extensive science, are as deeply involved in moral 
darkness before regeneration, as the weak and illiterate 
part of mankind. Through the pride of carnal reasoning, 
they go astray, and reject the counsel of God. The sim- 
ple truths of the Gospel were accounted, by the learned 
Greeks, " foolishness." They could see no consistency 
in salvation by grace, and through faith in a crucified 
Savior. It was exceedingly offensive to them, to be told, 
that they were such sinners as to deserve eternal damna- 
tion ; that they needed sovereign mercy ; and that they 
could not see the kingdom of God, without experiencing 
a change of heart. Scientific refinement, and conformity 
to a system of ethics, were the grounds of their reliance for 
acceptance with God. Hence, St. Paul says, " The Jews 
require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom ; but 
we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling 
block, and unto the Greeks foolishness ; but unto them 
who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power 
of God, and the wisdom of God." 

In all ages and nations, among all descriptions of men, 
" the preaching of the cross is, to them that perish, fool- 
ishness." " The carnal mind is enmity against God ;" 
direct hostility to every essential doctrine of Scripture. 
Those people who are disposed to resist the idea of their 
being totally depraved anterior to regeneration, give the 
strongest testimony they possibly can, that this is in fact 
their own situation. No lively and well-informed Chris- 
tian will ever dispute the entire depravity of man by nature. 
St. Paul says to a church, of whose members he enter- 
tained a high esteem, " Ye were sometimes darkness, 
but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of 
light." Eph. 5. 8. 

In the discussion of the present head, it may, 

1. Be proper to observe, that those who refuse to speak 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 213 

according to the Oracles of God, manifest that they have 
never been born of the Spirit. Hating the grand doctrines 
of the Gospel, is as great an evidence of impenitence, as an 
open transgression of the moral law. That God, who re- 
quires us to obey his voice, has also commanded us to' be- 
lieve his word. If we have been born of the Spirit, we 
shall have a respect for all the commandments of Jehovah. 
People may be moral to a certain degree, without having 
any regard to the Scriptures as a rule of life. Public opi- 
nion is the standard by which many regulate their behavior. 
They wish to be esteemed ; and, therefore, they aim to 
conduct themselves in conformity to the general tone of 
morals. Their character depends entirely on the state of 
the society in which they are placed. Their external con- 
formity to revealed religion, is, therefore, purely an acci- 
dental event. No example, however., will induce people 
to love the truth, as it is in Jesus Christ. Under the in- 
fluence of such an example, they may assent to divine 
doctrines ; but their hearts are as unreconciled to them, as 
the most open and daring opposers. " The carnal mind is 
enmity against God," under all circumstances. In this 
state, the heart is a chaos of moral darkness. No ray of 
divine light irradiates it for the space of a moment. It is 
no breach of charity to say, concerning the people who 
oppose the Trinitarian doctrines, that they have never 
been renewed by the power of the Holy Ghost ; for they 
deny that there is such an agent in contradistinction from 
the Father, or such a change as we view regeneration to 
be, produced in any human heart. Those passages of 
Scripture which speak of that event, are construed by them 
to mean nothing but the resurrection of the body. They 
cannot, therefore, be the subjects of a change, which they 
themselves believe to be unnecessary, and even impossible. 
We profess to have an entire faith in both these doctrines; 



214 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

and believe that it is because they have not been bom 
of the Spirit, that they refuse to speak according " to the 
law and the testimony." It is said in the text, " If they 
speak not according to this word, it is because there is no 
light in them." This is the same as to say that such people 
have never been " born of the Spirit." There may, how- 
ever, be a considerable degree of darkness, in relation to 
the deep things of God, in the minds of some who have 
been regenerated ; but we cannot admit that it is so thick, 
as to lead them to an open denial of the Divinity and Atone- 
ment of Christ — the Deity, Personality, and saving opera- 
tions of the Holy Ghost. These are fundamental princi- 
ples in the scheme of revealed religion ; and when they 
are given up, it takes away all claim to the Christian name. 
No one can be a real Christian, who has not been " born 
of the Spirit." This has been fully proved by Mr. Ward- 
law, in his admirable Sermon, on the Christian name. A 
departure from the cardinal doctrines of the Bible, renders 
the want of vital piety certain ; and every degree of hete- 
rodoxy, makes the thing, in some measure, doubtful. A 
complete soundness, in relation to the divine system, is ne- 
cessary, to exhibit shining evidence of being a real disci- 
ple of Jesus Christ. Soundness in the faith, is closely 
allied to holiness in action. The one is the tree, and the 
other its fruit. Corrupting the word of God, is ? 
therefore, no small crime in his view ; and we have co- 
gent reasons for saying, that an attempt to overturn its 
fundamental principles, is a clear indication of being his en- 
mies at heart. To say any thing less than this, would be 
a flat contradiction of the text which I am now illustrating. 
This would be a corruption of truth, to which, I hope, 
through grace, never to descend. 

Concerning the real ministers of the Gospel, St. Paul 
says, " For we are not as many, who corrupt the word of 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 215 

God , but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of 
God speak we in Christ." 2 Cor. 2. 17. No fear need to 
be entertained, in a faithful declaration of every divine 
doctrine. It stands approved of God ; and in it, the mi- 
nisters of Christ commend themselves to the consciences 
of men. 

There is darkness and light, therefore, in doctrines, as 
well as in actions. It is a mournful event, in itself consi- 
dered, to evince, by the sentiments which men believe and 
inculcate, that they have never been born of God. It is a 
fact, announced by Heaven, of the teachers who " speak 
not according to the word," that " it is because there is no 
light in them." The case of those who are disposed to 
receive their doctrines, is no less deplorable. 

2. The influence under which some people have been 
placed, is a reason why they refuse to speak according to 
the divine word. An inspired penman says, " Evil com- 
munications corrupt good manners." 1 Cor. 15. 33. The 
people who reject sound doctrine, have generally been 
taught to do it by false teachers and pernicious books, or 
such external causes as have had an influence over them. 
Therefore says the Prophet Isaiah, " The leaders of this 
people cause them to err ; and they that are led of them 
are destroyed." Corrupt doctrines, have as great a ten- 
dency to ruin the souls of men, as divine truth has to save 
them from death. The devil, therefore, has had an an in- 
terest in inventing and spreading every species of theolo- 
gical falsehood, that has appeared in this fallen world. 
There is a love in the human heart to unsound doctrines, 
and an innate opposition to every part of divine truthc 
This made the wicked Israelites " say to the seers, See not; 
and to the prophets, Prophecy not unto us right things, 
speak unto us smooth things, prophecy deceits — cause the 
Holy One of Israel to cease from before us," Tsa. 30, 



216 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

10, 11. It is a very easy matter to delude people, when 
they have such a strong propensity to be deluded. False 
instructors, are the most dangerous men in society. It ap- 
pears that God views them as the very dregs of mankind, 
from that solemn declaration, " The ancient and the hon- 
orable, he is the head ; and the prophet that teaches lies, 
he is the tail." Isa. 9. 15. 

God, in righteous judgment, sends such errors among 
men ; for all events are under the government of his holy 
providence. In speaking of sinners, St.. Paul says, - " They 
received not the love of truth that they might be saved. 
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, 
that they should believe a lie ; that they ail might be dam- 
ned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in un- 
righteousness." 2. Thess. 2. 10, 11. "Justice and judg- 
ment are the habitation of his throne;" and "he hath 
mercy on whom he will have mercy." Jehovah is an infi- 
nitely wise and glorious Sovereign ; and " none may stay his 
hand, or say unto him, what doest thou ?" His word is " a 
savor of life unto life, or of death unto death;" — and, there- 
fore, " it shall not return unto him void — it shall accomplish 
that which he pleases, and prosper in the thing whereto he 
sent it." As the human " heart is deceitful above all things, 
and desperately wicked," sinners will oppose divine truth, 
whenever men appear to influence them to it, and to fur- 
nish them with plausible arguments against it. It is a 
great blessing when people are not under the influence of 
contagious doctrines. Those whom God intends to save 
are, in general, mercifully preserved from the ruinous in- 
fluence of false instructions ; for when people are corrup- 
ted in their religious principles, there is very little hope 
of their salvation. It can hardly escape notice that the 
greater part of the hopeful converts in revivals of religion, 
are the youth who have descended from pious parents, and 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 21? 

received a sound theological education. Those who have 
every thing to prejudice their minds against divine truth, 
ministers, and pious people, from their youth ro the meri- 
dian of life, generally die as they have lived— the settled 
enemies of God. They refuse to " speak according to the 
law and the testimony $ often venturing to despise sacred 
things — even Christ and his church. It is a very unhappy 
event to have irreligious parents, and a pernicious early 
education. It is said by an inspired writer, " Train up a 
child in the way he should go, and when he is old, he will 
not depart from it." Truth and error are very opposite 
kinds of seed, and they generally produce a very different 
harvest. 

Theological falsehood is a species of seed which will take 
root very readily in our depraved hearts ; it will spring up 
soon,and its growth is generally luxuriant ; for the soil is well 
prepared for such seeds of death. They quickly produce the 
"grapes of Sodom and clusters of Gomorrah," ripening the 
soul for endless fire. The grand adversary takes great 
pains in employing every kind of delusion to support, en- 
large, and perpetuate his detestable kingdom. As he taught 
our first parents to disbelieve God, so he takes every artful 
method to teach their infatuated children to deny the truth 
of his Holy Oracles, and all the doctrines and precepts 
which they contain. In departing from " the law and the 
testimony," people show the schools in which they have 
been educated. 

3. The great height to which moral depravity has risen 
in the heart, is another reason that may be assigned for 
receding from the Scriptures, as the only standard of truth. 
All men, by nature, are totally depraved ; but there is a 
difference in the degrees of their wickedness. It is said 
in the Scriptures, " that evil doers and seducers, wax worse 

and worse, deceiving and being deceived," It is surpri- 

E F 



2\& THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

sing to see the difference that there generally is,, between 
young and old sinners; in point of candor and attention, 
in relation to religious subjects. The longer people live 
in the habit of rebellion against God, the more dense the 
darkness of the mind becomes. The hearts of many 
have grown as hard as the adamant stone, in relation to 
divine doctrines, whose moral character, in the view of 
men, appears very fair and respectable. Their supposed 
morality fortifies them against believing in a theological 
system, that makes salvation to be wholly the effect of 
free and sovereign grace. This was pre-eminently the 
case with the Jews, in many periods of time, and espe- 
cially in the apostolic age. St. Paul, therefore, says— 
" I bear them record, that they have a zeal of God, but 
not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of 
God's righteousness, and going about to establish their 
own righteousness, have not submitted themselves to the 
righteousness, of God. 5 ' Rom. 10. 2, 3. No greater en- 
emies ever appeared to the gospel, than the Scribes and 
Pharisees,and the devout and honorable people of the Jew- 
ish nation. Men of this character, conspired to slay " the 
Lord of glory," and executed a thing which made the earth 
tremble to its centre, and clothed the very heavens with a 
garment of the deepetb sackcloth ! Rejecting the Scrip- 
tures, as the only standard of truth and righteousness, is 
actually "breaking" Christ's "bands assunder, and cast- 
ing his cords from us." It is a sin of the highest magni- 
tude. The aged and venerable Eli, the priest of the Lord, 
said to his dissolute sons — " If one man sin against another, 
the judge shall judge him; but if a man sin against 
the Lord, who shall entreat for him?" Men may, there- 
fore, be very moral in respect to their fellow men, and jet 
be as hostile as fallen angels to God and his word. It is 
no small degree of depravity that makes people reject a 



THE ONLY STANDARD OF TRUTH. 219 

book, which is truths itself, and doctrines that are superla- 
tively glorious. The Scriptures have a great hold on the 
conscience of man, until it becomes " seared as with a hot 
iron." Then he will contend against thenl with a degree of 
temerity, that is enough to astonish the very heavens ! Ev- 
ery additional sin, serves to harden the heart and darken 
the understanding, in relation to things of a divine nature. 
When the word of God is renounced, as being the only 
proper guide, and reason, as it is called, placed in its stead, 
then that apostolic saying is literally fulfilled, " Having 
the understanding darkened, being' alienated from the life 
of God, through the ignorance that is in them ; because 
of the blindness of their heart." 

4. People flee from the Scripture as being the only test 
of truth, because that relieves their minds from the fear of 
eternity. That divine saying is strictly true, " A wounded 
spirit who can bear?" Every system of religious false- 
hood is soothing to the tortured conscience ; for it throws a 
cloud over the divine character— diminishes the evil of sin— 
magnifies the supposed virtues of man, and hides eternal 
ruin from his view. Some schemes, however, are better 
adapted to produce a state of indifference, in relation to 
eternity, than others. The more any given system ex* 
eludes of divine truth, the better it is calculated to lay the 
mind asleep. The scheme, to which these sermons are 
opposed, is well formed to operate as an anodyne, in 
respect to all religious seriousness. There is no other 
plan, bearing a Christian name, that I know of, that ex- 
cludes so much of divine truth. It is, in fact ,simple deism 
Christianized. It forms a complete veil, that hides every 
divine object from the sight. It has no concern with the 
Bible, in any other sense, than as a system of mere ethics. 
Its greatest difference from complete infidelity, is, in ad- 
mitting the resurrection of the body. It has no other ter- 



220 THE SCRIPTURES ARE 

ror for impenitent sinners, but annihilation. This ca» 
have but little effect on people, who are neither willing to 
go to heaven nor hell. One of their own writers justly 
remarks, that the scheme does not consist so much in be- 
lieving, as in not believing. In a word, it is a system of 
perfect moral darkness — excluding almost every truth of 
revealed religion, and the inspiration of the Book which 
contains it. Thus, the reasons have been assigned for their 
refusal to speak according to God's word; and, in so do- 
ing, they evince, as the text says, that " there is no light 
in them." As the Scripture says, " The natural man re- 
ceiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are 
foolishness unto him ; neither can he know them, because 
they are spiritually discerned." 2 Cor. 2. 14. But let 
our attention now be turned, to a suitable 

IMPROVEMENT. 

1. If the Holy Scripture is the only standard of faith 
and practice, and is inspired, then we may believe that it 
must have been under the special care of Divine Providence 
in every period of time. If it has not been dictated by the 
Holy Spirit — if it has been interpolated — if it has been 
mistranslated — if it has been essentially corrupted in any 
way, it cannot be considered now as a certain criterion of 
the Divine will. Every one may receive or reject it at his 
own pleasure, without any danger of exposing himself to 
the anger of God on that account. The adversaries of 
Trinitarian doctrines appear to be very fond of viewing 
the case in this light. Those people, however, who be- 
lieve in the plenary inspiration of Scripture, must, of course, 
believe that the providence of God has preserved it from 
being essentially injured by the hands of its enemies. No 
genuine Trinitarian is inclined so much as even to insi- 
nuate that the sacred writings are lame, in relation to any 



THE ONLY STANDARD OP TRUTH. 221 

point in the general system of theology. The men who 
are in the habit of inculcating a belief that the Bible is not 
the fruit of a plenary inspiration, and that it has been 
greatly altered from its original form, are endeavoring to 
support a system of doctrines which require such subter- 
fuges. This book has existed in the midst of its enemies, 
in every age ; and if Divine Providence had not protected 
it from their rage, there would not be the smallest vestige 
of it remaining now. That part of mankind whose "mind 
is enmity against God," cannot be very friendly to a cor- 
rect revelation of his character and will. This is the cha- 
racter of every human being, whose heart has not been re- 
newed by the Holy Ghost. We need not be alarmed, 
therefore, when the cry is raised, that the Scriptures are 
not divinely inspired, or that they have been corrupted. 
It is our duty and privilege, my hearers, to abide by " the 
law and the testimony ;" and if our opponents choose to 
appeal to any other standard, let them answer it to God. 
We must believe that his " word is very pure," and the 
only rule that is of divine authority. It is a fountain of 
living water, whose transparency has never been discolored 
by the admixture of any foreign and polluted streams. 

2. If the Scriptures are inspired, and are the only rule of 
doctrine and duty, it will follow, that an attack upon their 
authenticity is a bold undertaking. It requires such mag- 
nanimity as some of the British reviewers ascribed to Dr. 
Priestley, to attempt the thing without trembling. Men 
who are equal to this, must possess minds standing above 
the fear of every divine threatening. But from such mag- 
nanimity, may the Lord deliver us ! 

When men set out with an ardent desire of finding inter- 
polations, mistranslations, or any other corruptions, in the 
Scriptures, it is an evidence that they are unfriendly to 
some of the doctrines contained therein ; and, therefore, 



222 THE SCRIPTURES, &C. 

we need net be surprised, if God, in righteous judgment, 
permits them to think that they have succeeded in their 
researches, when there is no proof in the case, on which 
they may consistently rely. It has been noticed already, 
that the Lord sutlers some people, for their wickedness, to 
fall into " strong delusions, that they should believe a lie." 
The Lord said to Israel, by a prophet, " Every one, which 
separateth himself from me, and setteth up his idols in his 
heart, and putteth the stumbling block of his iniquity be- 
fore his face, and cometh to a prophet to enquire of him 
concerning me, I the Lord will answer him by myself; 
and I will set my face against that man, and I will make 
him a sign and a proverb, and I will cut him off from the 
midst of my people ; and ye shall know that I am the 
Lord. And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken 
a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet ; and I will 
stretch out my hand upon him, and I will destroy him 
from the midst of my people Israel. And they shall bear 
the punishment of their iniquity: the punishment of the 
prophet shall be even as the punishment of him that seek- 
eth unto him." Ezek. 14. 7 — 10. 

Thus, we see, that when people seek after error, they 
may be righteously blinded. In criticising upon Scrip- 
ture, care should be taken, lest we have some wicked end 
to answer by the thing. If we examine the Divine Ora- 
cles with a pure heart, we cannot fail in seeing that they 
are just like the God of purity and truth. The Scriptures 
will endure to the end of time ; and, therefore, they who 
keep the nearest to thern, are in the safest course. Amek. 



SERMON XT I. 



Galatians iv» 17. 

They zealously affect you, but not well 



Men have invented various ways, in their depraved im- 
agination, to escape deserved wrath and to obtain everlas- 
ting happiness. They are easily captivated with false 
schemes of theology ; but they are all more or less detri- 
mental to their eternal salvation. From the text and its 
connection, it appears that men were much disposed to de- 
part from the pure truths of Revelation, even in the age of 
miracles and inspiration. In relation to such people, St. 
Paul seems to have been deficient in displaying that char- 
ity, which is now by many, so highly applauded. He 
considered those, who taught doctrines opposite to his own, 
as troubling the churches of Christ. He had, in fact, the 
boldness to say, " I would they were even cut off which 
trouble you." Gal. 5. 12. The teachers that he referred 
to, were hostile to the doctrines of grace ; and inculcated, 
what they called good works, as the proper ground of ac- 
ceptance with God. He says to Timothy, " Desiring to 
be teachers of the law ; understanding neither what they 
say, nor whereof they affirm." 1. Tim. 1. 7. Every 
system of error, is calculated to flatter the pride of men — ■ 
to hide the beauty of holiness — to justify the sinner, and to 



224 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

eclipse the glor y of God in the work of salvation. On this 
account, the Apostle set his face against theological errors, 
in all their varied forms, saying, " But though we, or an 
angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than 
that which we have preached — let him be accursed." 
Gal. 1.8. He repeats this saying, in the succeeding verse, 
to show us the settled determination of his mind on this 
point. 

From St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, it appears 
that many false teachers had entered into that church, and 
corrupted the principles of its members to a high degree. 
This led him to exclaim " O foolish Galatians, who hath 
bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth !" Gah 
3. 1. Their schemes of error, however, seemed greatly 
to affect the minds of that people, and inspired them with 
an extraordinary degree of religious zeal. As they had 
such an effect on their hearers, no doubt, they appeared to 
be very zealous themselves, in all their performances. 
Their grand object was, to make the Galatians hate the 
true doctrines of the gospel — to love error — to esteem the 
teachers of it — and to despise the real Apostles and minis- 
ters of Christ. St. Paul, therefore, says of them, " They 
zealously affect you, but not well ; yea, they would exclude 
you, that ye might affect them." He, however, does not 
condemn zeal of the right kind ; for he proceeds in saying? 
" It is good to be zealously affected always in a good 
thing." 

But, alas ! men are more easily inflamed against the 
truth, than in favor of it ; for their hearts are, by nature, 
totally depraved. Nothing short of divine power and 
/ grace, will incline them to the doctrines of truth and ho- 

liness. Human nature is the same thing now, that it was 
in the days of the inspired writers ; and error has put on 
as great a variety of forms now, as ever it did in any ante- 



OF ANTI-TRINITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 225 

cedent period. It has lost nothing of its deleterious effect, 
on the glory of God and the best interest of men. It may, 
therefore, be said of false teachers in general, " They zeal- 
ously affect you, but not well." 

The leading object in the investigation of this subject, 
will be to show, 

THE BANEFUL EFFECTS OF CORRUPT 
DOCTRINES ON THE HUMAN MIND. 

Every religious system has its own peculiar moral ten- 
dency. There are two grounds, from which the truth or 
fallacy, the excellency or perniciousness, of any given sys- 
tem of doctrines, may be argued. They are called by di- 
vines, a priori, and a posteriori. The former is reasoning 
from the nature of the system itself; and the latter, from 
its moral effects on the hearts and lives of men. It is the 
last method of reasoning that will be principally followed 
in discoursing on this subject. It is not my intention to 
animadvert on every religious denomination that might be 
proved to err in doctrine. Neither is it designed to meddle 
with such people as disown the Christian name. The 
teachers St. Paul speaks of in the text, undoubtedly called 
themselves Christian ministers. Taking this important 
name, has given great curreney to ruinous theories in all 
ages. 

A few general remarks may be made, 

1 . On a scheme of theology, whose moral tendency is 
very pernicious ; and its relation to the subject in hand is 
sufficiently near to claim some attention. It is called Uni- 
versalism. This system may be divided into two distinct 
classes, as there are some shades of difference ; but the 
general principle is the same. Both these kinds of Uni- 
versalists pretend to believe in the ultimate and eternal hap- 
piness of all men. One of these classes wholly denies xll 
Ft 



226 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

punishment beyond the present life ; but the other admits 
a limited state of misery after death. It is no part of the 
present design, however, to examine the arguments by 
which these different schemes are said to be supported. 
There is no doubt, in my mind, that they are both falla- 
cious, and of a destructive moral tendency. You, my 
hearers, are undoubtedly, in general, of the same opinion, 
in respect to this denomination. It is not easy to say, 
which of these schemes is the most ruinous to the souls of 
jnen ; but they are both highways to eternal death. They 
perfectly agree in softening down the law of God — in di- 
minishing the evil of sin, and in opposing the belief that 
divine justice will ever be executed on the sinner, in a way 
of endless misery. No time need to be spent in proving 
that both these theories lead to a life of dissipation, and 
great indifference to all experimental and practical religion. 
This is sufficient to show that they are not of divine origin, 
nor calculated to convert the souls of men to God. A 
mournful want of religious seriousness, evidently appears 
in all the members of this fraternity — preachers and hear- 
ers. They generally speak of sacred things With a great 
degree of freedom and levity. Their general air indicates 
an unhumbled mind ; and very little prayer is to be heard 
among them. It is said, in the Scriptures, to be the work 
of the Holy Spirit to convince men of sin ; but no such 
impressions appear to be on any of their minds. In this 
community, no one is ever heard to ask the solemn and 
momentous question, " '.What shall I do to be saved _?" 
until he is convinced of the error of their system. They 
appear to have much less fear of sin, than the generality of 
unawakened sinners. In a word, Universalism is a doc- 
trine of darkness, and the first preacher of it w T as the grand 
enemy of God — the deceiver of mankind. He told our 
primitive parents, that in transgressing the Divine com- 



OF ANTI-TRINITIRIAMISM EXHIBITED, 227 

mand, they should escape punishment ; saying, " Ye shall 
not surely die." This is the very essence of Universalian 
doctrine : but in believing it, we must disbelieve God ; for 
he has expressly said in the Scriptures, that " the wicked 
shall be turned into hell ;" that they " shall go away into 
everlasting punishment." Ps. 9. 17; Matth. 25. 46. 

The scheme in view is, therefore, opposite in its nature 
and effects, to the best interests of society, as well as to the 
eternal salvation of the soul. But in hearing it preached, 
many are " zealously affected," and filled with a certain 
kind of love to the character which that system leads them 
to believe God sustains. It produces in them, however, 
no new obedience ; which is a clear evidence that its 
nature is spurious. The very men of the world are often 
forced to acknowledge, that the moral tendency of the 
doctrine is opposite to good order and righteousness. Still, 
it is propagated with great zeal, to a wide extent, and is 
highly applauded by many who have no desire to reform 
their ways. As it is a pleasing doctrine to the wicked 
heart, we need no further evidence of its falsehood. Its 
votaries, in general, abhor the doctrine of sovereign grace. 
But in opposing the justice of God, in the eternal damna- 
tion of the sinner, the beauty of divine mercy cannot be 
seen; such people can have no sense of their need of it. 
Therefore, to be affected with this scheme, is " not well." 

2. There is another system, whose distorted features, it 
is the principle design to delineate, in the prosecution of 
this subject. It is the very theory to which the preceding 
sermons stand opposed ; namely, Anti-Trinitarianism. 
This general system may be divided into several distinct 
species ; from the consideration, that some of them allow 
more, and others less degrees of dignity to the Lord Jesus 
Christ. 

They are all, however, equally opposed to the doctrine 
of a Trinity of Persons in God—to the proper Deity and 



i£28 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

Atonement of the Redeemer. But these slight shades 
of difference, do not interrupt their harmony, nor greatly 
impede their operations in opposing the Orthodox. My 
remarks, however, will be principally made on that class 
of Anti- Trinitarians, who reside in this vicinity. They are 
the disciples of Socinus rather than of Alius, yet, they 
seem to be unwilling to take the Socinian name. The 
difference seems to be this ; — -Socinus advocated the pro- 
priety of worshipping Christ, while he believed him to be 
nothing but a man, which our modern Anti-Trinitarians, 
with a greater consistency with the scheme, refuse to per- 
form. I have not been able to learn, that there is any oth- 
er material difference between Socinus and the Anti-Trinita- 
rians in this region. It is the moral tendency of the sys- 
tem, as it is held here, with which we are chiefly concern- 
ed. In attending to that, however, the nature and tenden- 
cy of the system at large may be ascertained. 

The plan, to which these discourses stand opposed, is 
essentially different from our views, in every prominent 
feature. If that is divine truth, then we are as really idola- 
ters as the heathen world : but if we are correct, then our 
opponents are nominally christians, but real infidels. These 
conclusions cannot be consistently denied ; yet the Anti- 
Trinitarians seem to be loth to admit them. This arises 
from their latitudinarianism, and the non-importance which 
they attach to doctrinal opinions. But that is mere pre- 
tence; for they show the greatest possible opposition to Cal- 
vinistic doctrines, and declare that they are hostile to all 
virtue — repugnant to the glory and government of God. 
These things will be made to appear, in the subsequent 
part of this subject. 

I am, by no means, disposed to take offence at their say- 
ings on these points ; for if their system is the right one, 
they must necessarily believe, that we can never go to hea- 



OF ANTI-TRINITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 229 

ven in our idolatry. It is said in the word of God, that 
" idolaters shall have their part in the lake that burnetii 
with fire and brimstone, which is the second death." 
Rev. 21. 8. It is equally clear, that if we are right, they 
are " denying the Lord that bought them ;" and the Apos- 
tle says, that such people are " bringing upon themselves^ 
swift destruction." 2 Pet, 2. 1. The difference, there- 
fore, between these systems, is as great as that between light 
and darknes, heaven and hell. Shall we then compliment 
each other, as fellow Christians ? No ; no such relation 
can exist between us. It is justly said by one of their own 
writers, that " people, whose religious sentiments are so 
dissimilar, cannot be fellow worshippers in the same tem- 
ple."* The effects of our system and their's, therefore, 
must be entirely different on the human mind. In the 
next sermon, I shall attempt to show more particularly, 
how the scheme that I am opposing, operates on the hearts 
and lives of men. Amen. 

*The Rev. " Samuel Miller, D. D. Professor of Ecclesiastical History and 
Church Government, in the Theological Seminary of the Presbyterian Chi:* oh 
in the United States, at Princeton," says, that he had an interview with " Dr. 
Priestley, two or three years before" his " decease," at which time, Dr. Priest^ 
ley said, " I do not wonder that you Calvinists entertain and express a strong- 
ly unfavorable opinion of us Unitarians. The truth is, there neither can, nor 
ought to be, any compromise between us. If you are right, WE ARE NOT 
CHRISTIANS AT ALL; and if roe are right, you ARE GROSS IDOLA- 
TERS." [See the Southern Intelligencer for March 30, 1322, page SO,] 



SERMON XYII. 



Galatians 4. 17. 
They zealously affect you, but not ivelL 



One discourse has been delivered from this passage. 
The proposition deduced from it, is, 

THE BANEFUL EFFECTS OF CORRUPT 
DOCTRINES ON THE HUMAN MIND. 

In the illustration of it, some remarks were made, 

l.'Oria scheme of theology called Universalism, which 
holds a near relation to the system against which these 
sermons are levelled. 

2, Some general things were said on the moral ten- 
dency of Anti-Trimtarianism. But in descending to par- 
ticulars, we may observe, 

1. How that system leads its advocates to treat the 
Scripture and its doctrines. It has been fairly proved, in 
the. preceding sermons, that they wholly deny the plenary 
inspiration of the Bible. The evidence of this fact, there- 
fores need not be repeated. The writings which we con- 
sider as sacred, they treat with as little ceremony as the 
productions of any other faithful historians. In one word, 
they believe what they please of them, and reject the rest 
Their whole scheme appears to be doubtfulness, and open 
denial. They deny the Trinity — the Deity of Christ— 
his Atonement— the Personality and peculiar Offices of the 






THE MORAL TENDENCY, &C. 231 

Holy Ghost — the decrees arid sovereignty of God — the 
unalterable nature of the moral law — the uncancellablc 
obligation of all intelligent beings to perfect holiness — un- 
conditional submission — disinterested benevolence — total 
depravity — instantaneous regeneration by the Spirit's 
power — the certain perseverance of the saints — and eternal 
punishment. They make great objections to the justice 
of God, in punishing any of his creatures. The belief 
seems to be greatly prevailing among them, that the souls 
of men sleep with their bodies until the resurrection, and 
that the wicked are to be eternally annihilated. When 
the plan is closely examined, it appears to be a compound 
of infidelity and Arminianism. As far as it relates to the full 
inspiration of the Scriptures, and the manner of the divine 
existence, it is nearly allied to simple Deism ;. and as it 
relates to other doctrines, it leans to salvation by works in- 
stead of grace. It is, therefore, a medley of almost every 
thing that is false and pernicious. I am, by no means, 
alone in this opinion ; for every writer among the Orthodox 
has made similar observations. If I know* my own heart, 
I am far from wishing to misrepresent any thing that is be- 
lieved by my opponents. -If they are willing to assent to 
any of the points that I have said they deny, let them avow 
their belief; and I will cheerfully retract what I have said. 
It would give me much pleasure to have them acknow- 
ledge any of the essential doctrines believed by the Or- 
thodox. On a subject of such magnitude, honesty is 
beautiful ; it is the best policy that can possibly be pursued. 
2. A brief view will be taken of what the Anti-Trini- 
tarian system leads its advocates to believe. Their articles 
of faith are few, and unimportant. They differ from mere 
infidels, however, in admitting that God has made some 
communications of his will to the Prophets and Apostles ; 
but they deny that he has so far superintended their wri- 



232 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

tings, as to secure them from error. They think them- 
selves justifiable, therefore, in using their own reason to 
correct the productions of those messengers of Heaven. 
They differ in some degree, also, from the Deists, in rela- 
tion to their view of Jesus Christ. It is admitted by both 
sects, that there was such a man ; and both believe that 
he was nothing but a man. The Anti- Trinitarians, how- 
ever, believe that he was sent of God, to instruct men by 
his precepts and examples, and to seal the truth of his 
mission by his death ; but these things are wholly denied 
by avowed Deists. So much difference really exists be- 
tween these denominations. But, by the Orthodox, that 
disparity must be considered as a trivial matter — as a shade 
scarcely discernible, when compared with their views of 
"the Lord of glory." If the Supreme Divinity of Christ 
is given up, the foundation is sapped at once on which the 
Church is built. 

The Anti-Trinitarians acknowledge that there will be 
a resurrection of human bodies ; and that is the only es- 
sential thing, besides the being of God, in which they 
agree with the Orthodox. They seem to be much pleas- 
ed with their own soundness in this respect ; and we are 
willing to give them credit for it. A future and general 
judgment, is a doctrine allowed by them, and that Christ 
is to be the judge; but they differ greatly from us, in re- 
lation to the circumstances of that momentous scene. 
But acknowledging Jesus Christ to be the judge of the 
world, is wholly inconsistent with the belief of his simple 
humanity. No mere creature can be capable of raising 
the dead, and of properly discerning the character, and 
deciding the destiny of angels and men. To think that a 
mere man is suitably qualified for these high operations, is 
infinitely more unreasonable, than a belief of the Trinity 
in Unity. Raising the dead, and judging the intelligent 



OF ANTI-TRINITARIANISM EXPOSED. 23$ 

worlds, are said in Scripture, to be the proper works of 
God. David says, " God is judge himself." Ps. 50. 6. 
In St. Paul's defence before king Agrippa, he said, " Why 
should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God 
should raise the dead ?" Acts 26. 8. If these things are 
the proper works of God, and yet are performed by Jesus 
Christ, it must follow, that he is the Supreme God. When 
we take into view the very few things which our oppo- 
nents will admit as the truths of the Bible, it must be 
greatly altered to have it accord with their sentiments. If 
they are correct, that book must have been so interpolated 
and altered by the Trinitarians, that no confidence can be 
reposed now, in any part of it. Every one may take the 
liberty of setting aside what he pleases of its contents ; 
and, if some should be disposed to deny the whole, they 
could not, on their principles, be deemed very guilty. 

3. It is necessary to consider the light in which the An- 
ti- Trinitarian system leads its advocates to view the char- 
acter of God. In denying his decrees, as they relate to 
all events in the natural and moral world, divine wisdom 
is impeached, and God is, in a great degree, dependent on 
his own creatures. 

As I understand their plan, it is a very material part of 
it, to believe that the supreme end of Jehovah in his works, 
is the happiness of his intelligent creatures, instead of the 
glory of his own name. This is an impeachment of his 
power, for many of them, contrary to the original inten- 
tion of God, will have to be eternally annihilated. 

Dr. Priestley says, " Those who assume to themselves 
the distinguishing title of Orthodox, consider the Supreme 
Being as having created all things for his own glory, and 
by no means for the general happiness of all his creatures." 
This sentence shows, very fully, that his opinion accords 

ynth what I have said of the Anti-Trinitarian svstem, 

Go 



234 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

There are two grand difficulties, however, attending the 
idea, that God makes "the general happiness of all his 
creatures," his supreme end. The first is, that the thing 
would be the preference of a less to a greater good ; and 
the second is, that if this is God's supreme end, it is never 
like to be accomplished. This would be charging the 
Creator of all things with folly in his plan, and imbecility 
in its execution. Their views of the divine character are, 
therefore, unreasonable, and contrary to the Holy Scrip- 
tures. The Bible positively says, that " God hath made 
all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day 
of evil." Prov. 16.4. The Lord also saith — "Every 
one that is called by my name, I have created him for my 
glory." Isa. 43. 7. 

But the reason of their believing that God makes " the 
happiness of all his creatures" his supreme end, is proba- 
bly this, that they cannot love him on any other conside- 
ration. This, however, is the very state of the humam 
heart by nature— it " is enmity against God." Rom. 8. 
7. False systems of theology eclipse the moral character 
of the Deity; and it is for this purpose, undoubtedly, that 
such schemes are invented and promulgated. 

No plan can be better calculated to give wrong im 
pressions on this subject, than Anti-Trinitarianism ; for 
none that professes any belief in the Scriptures, can be 
more repugnant to them. That Book leads us to consider 
it as high evidence of God's glory, that " Justice and judg- 
ment are the habitation of his throne f and that he " will 
by no means clear the guilty." The human heart is vio- 
lently opposed to this representation of the Divine charac- 
ter. In relation to this view of vindictive justice, Dr. 
Priestley says, that in holding it, we " represent God in 
such a light, that no earthly parent could imitate him, 
without si?s:aimng a ckaracu. dag 3 mankind." Tr 




OF ANTI-TRINITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 235 

is evident, however, that the Scriptures do represent him 
as an absolute sovereign in the government of the universe, 
and as an " avenger of iniquity," in relation to finally im- 
penitent sinners; punishing them " with everlasting de- 
struction from the presence of the Lord, and from the 
glory of his power." As our opponents consider these 
things to be unamiable traits in the character of Jehovah, 
we must believe that they stand opposed to that which is 
moral beauty in unlimited perfection. This is " striving 
with their Maker," and saying, " Why hast thou made me 
thus ?" The whole scheme, therefore, is calculated to 
excite rebellious feelings in the human breast, against the 
moral character of the Almighty. Their teachers ex- 
pressly say, that it is not consistent with infinite goodness, 
to make an intelligent creature, whose misery shall be 
such, that his existence shall be worse than to have no 
being. 

They all appear, therefore, to be settled in the opinion, 
that either there will be a universal restoration, or that the 
wicked will be eternally annihilated. A universal restora- 
tion, is the avowed belief of Dr. Priestley. He says, no 
one of his sentiments " supposes that any of the human 
race will be eternally miserable ;" and that " God has 
created us all for happiness — ultimate, unlimited happi- 
ness." But notwithstanding the Dr.'s opinion on the sub- 
ject, many of his brethren profess to believe in the doctrine 
of annihilation. In this, however, they are pretty much 
agreed, not to exhibit any terror to sinners, either from the 
press or the pulpit. They must, of course, believe that 
these passages, " Wo unto the wicked ! it shall be ill with 
him ;" and, " It had been good for that man, if he had 
not been born ;" with many others of similar import, must 
be interpolations, or greatly altered by the Orthodox, in 
making the translations in which they appear. But in 



236 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

their system, we find much of the same spirit that is re- 
probated in the 50th Psalm : " Thou though test that 1 
was altogether such an one as thyself." Any scheme of 
religion which serves to overthrow the doctrine of vindic- 
tive justice, is pleasing to the unreconciled heart ; but that 
is a certain evidence of its fallacy. When criminals argue 
in their own favor, their reasonings may be very different 
from the judgment that an enlightened and impartial court 
will pass upon their case. The Anti- Trinitarian plan is, 
unhappily, at variance with every essential doctrine con- 
tained in the Oracles of God ; and it gives us a view of 
his moral character, which is the very reverse of that which 
is given there. It is, therefore, false ; and ought to be 
rejected by all men, now and forever. But, 

4. We may take a concise view of Anti-Trinitarianism, 
as it relates to the character of man. Here, my hearers, a 
cloud of moral darkness appears, that is thick and awful 
as the darkness of midnight, and which nothing but omnip- 
otence can dispel ! An eye than cannot see the glory of 
God, must be, in an equal degree, blind to the moral defor- 
mity of man. In the Scriptures, the whole human race 
are represented as being totally sinful — depraved from the 
very commencement of life, and under condemnation, un- 
til they are renewed and pardoned. 

This doctrine very fully appears from the following ex- 
pressive passages ; namely, " The carnal mind is enmity 
against God." Rom. 8. 7. " That which is born of the 
flesh is flesh." John 3. 6. " There is none that doeth 
good, no not one." Rom. 3. 12. " There is no fear of 
God before their eyes." Verse 18. " The natural man 
receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God ; for they 
are foolishness unto him ; neither can he know them, be- 
cause they are spiritually discerned." 1 Cor. 2. 14. " The 
wicked go astray as soon as they be born." Ps. 58, 3* 



, OF ANTI-TRIMITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 237 

ki Behold I was shapen in iniquity." Ps. 51. 5. " Cur- 
sed is every one that continueth not in all things written in 
the book of the law to do them." Gal. 3. 10. " If any 
one offend in one point, he is guilty of all." James 2. 10. 
"The wicked shall be turned into hell." Ps. 9. 17. 
f*. These shall go away into everlasting punishment.'" 
Math. 25. 46. " He that believeth not, shall not see life : 
but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3. 36. 

With these declarations of God in our mind, let us now 
proceed to examine the Anti- Trinitarian theory. How 
soon the sound is changed ! By that system we are taught, 
that man is born in a state of perfect innocence, and through 
his whole life, more inclined to virtue than to vice. In rela- 
tion to the first opinion, namely, that we are born in a 
state of innocency, I shall not adduce any thing from their 
writings to prove it, being fully assured that there is not 
one, of that fraternity, who would wish to assert the con- 
trary. Even in regard to the sins of adults, the most soft 
and extenuating expressions are used by their writers, w T hen 
they speak on the subject. Mr. Belsham calls sin " human 
frailty," and those who commit it, " the frail and erring 
children of men." This is very gentle language when 
speaking of that, which God saith, " My sou! hateth." A 
certain writer, in that liberal school, says, " The Supreme 
law-giver determined from the beginning to mitigate the 
rigor of the law, to make allowances for human error and 
imperfection." Is not this, my hearers, lessening sin at 
a wonderful rate ? yes ; it is pleading the sinner's cause at 
the expense of divine honor. 

But in relation to human virtue, that class of men con- 
sider it as having no cause extrinsic of men, but the em- 
pire of motives. Dr. Priestley says of man, that " his own 
disposition and actions are the necessary and sole means of 
his present and future happiness ; so that in the proper 



238 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

sense of the words, it depends entirely upon himself wheth- 
er he be virtuous or vicious, happy or miserable. But, how 
does this assertion accord with St. Paul's declaration? 
" It is not. of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, 
but of God that showeth mercy." Rom. 9. 16. The 
same Apostle expresses a very different sentiment, in ask- 
ing, " Who maketh thee to differ from another ? and 
what hast thou, that thou didst not receive. Now if thou 
didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not- 
received it ?" 1 Cor. 4. 7. Thus you see, my hearers, 
that the An ti -Trinitarian view of human virtue is wild in 
the extreme, and at war with the Scriptures. It evidently 
raises the character of man beyond the bounds assigned to 
it in revealed religion, Mr. Belsham has so high an idea 
of the inclination of man to virtue rather than to vice, that he 
says, " In process of time, the earth may revert to its ori- 
ginal paradisiacal state- — and death itself be annihilated." 
This shows very clearly, that though Anti-Trinitarians 
glory in their own own supposed rationality, and eminent 
attainments in the empire of letters ; that they are not al- 
together invulnerable to enthusiasm. They take great 
care, however, to apprise us, that this wonderful change 
in the condition of man, is to be effected without any special 
agency of the Koly Spirit. Nothing of that nature can be 
admitted in their theorizing minds. No ; all is to be done 
by moral suasion and human energy- — the glory must be 
ascribed to man, instead of God. But the agreement of 
such schemes with Revelation, is unhesitatingly submitted 
to your judgment. 

As to our various opinions on points of doctrine, Dr. 
Priestley says, " There are no errors but what men may 
be so circumstanced as to be innocently betrayed into ; and 
that any mistake of the head is very consistent with recti- 
tude of heart." St. Paul, therefore, must have been mis- 



OF ANTI-TRINITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 239 

taken, and highly censorious, in saying, "If any man preac h 
another gospel unto you, let him be accursed." As the 
innocency of false sentiments in matters of religion, is not 
a doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures, advocating it 
must he very wicked. But, to justify sinners at all events, 
in almost every thing, appears to be one of the most pro- 
minent features in the Anti-Trinitarian system. The 
Bible, however, tells us, " Not to think of ourselves more 
highly than we ought to think ;" to "accept the punishment 
of our iniquity ;" to put on humility as a garment ; to 
rejoice in the sovereignty of God ; and to acknowledge 
freely our dependence on his power and grace. Such un- 
conditional submission is a beauty in the character of man, 
and the only proper way of honoring God. We cannot 
stand on any other ground before the glorious tribunal of 
the Almighty. He says expressly, " He that covereth his 
sins, shall not prosper ; but whoso confesseth and for- 
saketh them, shall have mercy." The system of our op- 
ponents has little to do with such feelings and acknow- 
ledgments. Being whole in their own imagination, they 
see no need of such a Physician as we suppose the Lord 
Jesus Christ to be. Human virtue is confessed by them 
to be the ground of their dependence. On these sacred 
Words, " Other foundation can no man lay, than that 
which is laid," one of their writers says, "All other foun- 
dation beside a good moral life, is chimerical" — a flat 
contradiction of the text on which lie professes to found 
his remark. The liberty which they take- with the Holy- 
Scriptures, is truly astonishing ! The art and assiduity 
which they display, in making every thing on their side of 
the question appear plausible, exceed description. Nothing 
is left undone that will veil the true character of God, and 
flatter sinners with the idea of their own virtue and safety. 
There were a set of teachers also in Israel, who cried 



,240 THE MORAL TENDENCY, &C 

peace, " when there was no peace." It may be justly said 
to such instmcters, " With lies ye have made the heart of 
the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and 
strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not 
return from his wicked way, by promising him life." Ez. 
13. 22. A system, whose most prominent feature is to 
lessen human guilt, and to lead mankind to rely on another 
foundation for salvation besides the atonement of Christ, is 
certainly hostile to the Scriptures in a high degree. An 
Apostle says, " By grace are ye saved through faith ; and 
that not of yourselves : it is the gift of God. Not of works, 
lest any man should boast." Eph. 2. 8, 9. 

If any religious scheme on the face of the earth is false 
and dangerous, and opposite to the Gospel of Christ, it is 
Anti-Trinitarianism in its lowest Socinian form- It is, I 
hope, in friendship to them, as well as to the cause of the 
Redeemer, that I speak in this manner. I am not conscious 
of having the least malevolence towards any one of that 
denomination. They may rely on every act of kindness 
that I can render them, in accordance with a faithful testi- 
mony against their doctrine. If I know my own heart, I 
wish them to be happy here and hereafter ; not excepting 
the gentleman who has appeared as my opponent. I have 
no apprehension that he has taken this stand from any 
unkind feelings to me ; for his deportment has been uni- 
formly conciliating and respectful. 

My prayer is, that the Lord may lead him into a belief 
of the truth, and to the love of it ; that he may follow the 
steps of the famous Dr. Scott, who once stood on the same 
untenable ground in relation to religious sentiments. — 
Amen. 



SERMON XVIII. 

Galatians iv. 17. 
Tliey zealously affect you, but not well 



In Illustrating the baneful effects of Anti-Trinitarian 

doctrines, on the hearts and lives of men, it has been 

shown, 

1. That they lead them to treat the Holy Scriptures, 

with an unbecoming freedom — to deny much of their con- 
tents, and to believe very little — to have wrong views of 
the glorious character of God ; and to have WTong concep- 
tions of the state and character of men. These are seri- 
ous evils ; but I think, that they have been fully substan- 
tiated ; and therefore I shall proceed in showing, 

5. How the system in view, leads men to ha#e low con- 
ceptions of Jesus Christ, and consequently, but a small de- 
gree of love to his name. It seems to be a point decided 
in the minds of the Anti-Trinitarians, that He is nothing but 
a man. They can of course have no belief in the atoning 
efficacy of his blood ; nor, w r ith consistency, render to Him 
supreme worship. He can have but little pre-eminence 
in their view, to the Prophets and Apostles. They suppose 
him, indeed, to have been sent of God to teach men truth 
and duty by his precepts and example ; and that he sealed 

his mission bv his death. On this calculation. how r ever. he 
Hh 



242 THE "MORAL TENDENCY 

only stands first on the list of human, but divinely author- 
ized messengers from God. We cannot, therefore, be 
much more indebted to him, than to many others, who 
have appeared in the capacity of divine instructors, on the 
plan in question. Surely, the Anti- Trinitarians them- 
selves must be at a loss, how to understand and define the 
measure of love which men owe to the Lord Jesus Christ. 
If he is no more than a creature, the love which belongs 
to him from men, must be infinitely less than that which 
is due to God. On the Anti-Trinitarian plan, great care 
must be taken, i^st the love that is felt for Christ exceeds 
its due limits; and the reverence that is given to him, de- 
generate into idolatry. On this ground, however, they do 
not seem to be in much clanger of erring ; for, it appears 
to be a. prominent feature in their scheme, to sink his dig- 
nity instead of deifying him : and all the teachers on that 
side of the question, seem to be on the alert in giving it 
the proper application. In general, they are coolly phi- 
losophising on the supposed impossibility of his deity, in- 
stead of bowing the knee to him in supreme worship. 
We may search the ranks of the iinti-Trinitarian host in 
vain, to find any bright examples of love to the Son of 
God ! No ; it is their constant employment to throw wa- 
ter on this divine flame. 

The contrast between the teachers in their Israel and 
the inspired writers, in relation to the. dignity of Christ, and 
the love which is due to his name, is astonishingly great. 
Do they say that he is a mere man ? see how the prophet 
Isaiah differs from them on this subject. While he admits 
his humanity, he announces his divinity in accents of tri- 
umph ; saying, " Unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is 
given : and the government shall be upon his shoulder ; 
and his name shall be called, Wonderful, Counsellor, The 
mighty God, The everlasting Father \ The Prince of peace? 



OP ANTI-TRINITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 243 

Isa. 9. 6. All the statements of Scripture, relating to the 
complete Person of Christ, run in a similar strain of exul- 
tation. St. John says of Him, " In the beginning was 
the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word 
ivas God — All things were made by Him. — In Him was 
life-; and the life was the light of men. — That was the 
true light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the 
world. — The W T ord was made flesh, and dwelt amon°- us 
and we beheld his glory." John 1.1, 3, 9, 14. Under 
divine authority, St. Paul asserts, that " He is over all, 
God blessed forever." Rom. 9. 5. — " That by Him all 
things were created that are in heaven, and that are in 
earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or do- 
minions, or principalities, or powers : all things were crea- 
ted by him and for him : and He is before all things, and 
by him all things consist." Gal. 1. 16, 17. That He hath 
" a name which is above every name : that at the name of 
Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and 
things in earth." Phil. 2. 9, 10. The Father himself, 
saith unto the Sou, " Thy throne, O God, is forever and 
ever. — And thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foun- 
dation of the earth : and the heavens are the works of thine 
hands." Heb. 1. 8, 10. This is but a mere specimen 
however, of what the Scriptures say, in relation to the Per- 
son and dignity of Christ. We meet with no such sayings, 
in the works of Anti-Trinitarian authors. Such language 
would be to them an abomination. 

The Holy Scriptures are equally express, as to the de- 
gree of love which we owe to the glorious Redeemer. In 
them, Christ says to us, " He that loveth father or mother 
more than me, is not worthy of me ; and he that loveth 
son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me." 
Matth. 10. 37. In Luke, it is said, "Yea; his own life 
also." Chap. 14. 26. A supreme love to Jesus Christ, is 



244 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

the most prominent feature in the character of his disciples. 
To that class of men, St. Peter says of Christ, " Whom 
having not seen, ye love ; in whom, though now ye see 
him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable, 
and full of glory." 1 Pet. 1.8. In relation to this, St. 
Paul says, " If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, 
let him be Anathema Maran-atha." 1 Cor. 16. 22. Again, 
he says, " Grace be with all them that love our Lord Jesus 
Christ in sincerity." Eph. 6. 24. But to such views of 
the Redeemer's Person, and such love to his name, the 
Anti-Trinitarians appear to be utter strangers. In fact, 
Dr. Priestley says, " In no sense whatever, not even in the 
lowest of all, is Christ so much as called God in all the 
New Testament." He is not, therefore, in the Dr.'s es- 
teem, so highly honored as some men, of whom the Lord 
saith, " Ye are gods." Such a low opinion of Christ's 
Person, never can lead those who have it, to render any 
great degree of love to his name. Seeing the whole body 
of Anti-Trinitarians appear to admire Dr. Priestley, it 
must follow, that they agree with him in respect to Christ's 
Person, and the degree of love to which he is entitled. 

But let their views and feelings be compared with the 
following ascription of praise which is offered to Christ 
in heaven ; namely, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, 
to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, 
and honor, and glory, and blessing." Rev. 4. 12. The 
dread of the An ti- Trinitarians of becoming guilty of ido- 
latry, must forever prevent them from saying, Amen. 

Thus, my hearers, a system, whose tendency is to chill 
Our love to Christ, must be considered as having a bane- 
ful effect on true piety. Real christians, therefore, must 
view every degree of approximation to it, with a holy 
fear. But, 

6, It is necessary to show how the theory in question. 



OF ANTI-TRINITIRIANISM EXHIBITED. 245 

leads its deluded votaries to treat the Orthodox. In some 
of the preceding sermons, we have seen the sanguinary 
manner in which they were dealt with, in the Arian ages. 

I have been informed, however, that the gentleman in 
opposition, has availed himself of the death of Servetus, 
by the concurrence of the deservedly esteemed John Cal- 
vin, as an offset to what I have said in relation to the per- 
secution that the Orthodox suffered from the Arians. 
But that solitary instance of impropriety, on the part, of 
that great reformer, • is a light balance indeed, against the 
murder of thousands and tens of thousands, who fell 
under the hands of Anti-Trinitarians, in the fourth and 
fifth centuries. He is welcome to all the consolation 
which he can derive from that circumstance, and to all the 
evidence it affords in his favor. If the Rev. John Calvin 
is as guilty as he insinuates, we wholly disapprove of his 
conduct; but much might said in his, defence, if it were 
not a departure from the main subject. 

It is, however, well understood, that our opponents lay 
an almost exclusive claim to candor, benevolence, liberal- 
ity, and every other moral excellence ; while we freely ac- 
knowledge our imperfection to be great, in every thing 
that is excellent. But Dr. Fuller very justly remarks, 
" that the candor of which the Anti-Trinitarians so large- 
ly boast, is pretty much confined to their own party, or to 
those who are near akin to them. Socinians' can be kind 
to Arians, and Arians to Socinians, and each of them to 
Deists ; but if Calvinists expect to come in for a share, let 
them not greatly wonder if they be disappointed. * ? The 
hatred they feel to our system, leads them to say many 
things not very congenial with that charity to which they 
lay so high a claim. Let us hear Mr. Lindsey in relation 
to this. He says, " The doctrine of Christ being possessed 
of two natures, is the fiction of ingenious men, determined 



246 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

at all events to believe Christ to be a different being from 
what he really was, and uniformly declared himself to be ; 
by which fiction of theirs, they elude the plainest declara- 
tions of Scripture concerning him, and will prove him to 
be the most High God, in spite of his own most express 
and constant language to the contrary. And as there is 
no reasoning With such persons, they are to be pitied, and 
considered as being under a debility of mind in this re- 
spect." 

In speaking of the celebrated Augustine, one of their 
writers calls him " a pretended saint, but an illiterate hy- 
pocrite, of wicked dispositions." Alas ! ail his humble 
confessions could not wipe away, in the view of this writer, 
the crime of his Trinitarianism. By another of these 
candid gentlemen, the Orthodox ministers are called " a 
set of fools and enthusiasts ; staring, stamping, and damn- 
ing in nonsense; whining out the tidings of salvation, tell- 
ing their auditors that grace is cheap, and works are all an 
empty bubble." But all this is far exceeded by another 
of these liberal authors. He says, " I challenge the whole 
body and being of moral evil itself, to invent, or inspire, 
or whisper any thing blacker or more wicked ; yea, if sin 
itself had all the wit, the tongues and pens of all men and 
angels to all eternity, I defy it to say any thing worse of 
God than this. O sin ! thou hast spent and emptied thy- 
self in the doctrine of John Calvin. I renounce the doc- 
trine as the rancor of devils-; a doctrine, the preaching of 
which is babbling and mocking, its prayers blasphemy, 
and whose praises are the horrible yellings of sin and hell ? } 
This is an awful specimen of candor, liberality, and Chris- 
tian charity ! No doubt, their hatred of the doctrines of 
grace is great ; neither do we suppose that their feelings 
are very pleasant in relation to those who inculcate them, « 
This is human nature — " enmity against God ;" and. 



tiF ANTI-TRINITAKlAxMSM EXHIBITED. 247 

therefore, all our resentment should be prayers and tears. 
It is important, however, that we should guard against a 
system whieh leads to such feelings and expressions. We 
know who hath told us, " Ye shall be hated of all men for 
my name's sake." Let us, therefore, say like Him, " Fa- 
ther forgive them ; for they know not what they do." In 
relation to such a virulent spirit, we should remember that 
inspired saying, " And such were some of you." The 
brightest of the saints have once been " children of wrath, 
even as others." This is a humbling consideration, and 
calculated to produce in our hearts the law of kindness, 
even towards enemies. The voice of God to us is, " Let 
all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamor, and evil 
speaking, be put away from you, with all malice ; and be 
ye kind one to another, even as God for Christ's sake hath 
forgiven you." Eph. 4. 31, 32. For "the fruit of the 
Spirit is love, peace, long suffering, gentleness, goodness, 
faith, meekness, temperance." Gal. 5. 22, 23. The re- 
ligion of Christ teaches us, " Not to be desirous of vain 
glory, provoking one another." 

We have our doubts, whether the system of our oppo- 
nents leads to such a spirit; but if it does, it will appear, 
notwithstanding all that we can say. To the judgment 
of candid observers, therefore, the systems must be sub- 
mitted which we profess to believe, in relation to their 
moral tendency. In faithfulness, we must deny the truth 
of their scheme, and the possibility of being Christians 
with such principles ; and these things will, of course, sub- 
ject us in their view, to the charge of bigotry and super- 
stition. But nothing which they can either say or do, 
will justify us in bringing against them, " a railing accusa- 
tion." It behoves us to show, by the meekness of our tem- 
per, and the propriety of all our sayings, the purifying 
tendency of the doctrines we profess. We may, however, 



248 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

have an unfavorable opinion of a doctrinal system, and of 
its moral tendency, without having any unkind feelings to 
its advocates. 

7. We will proceed to show how the Anti- Trinitarian 
system leads men to neglect the everlasting concerns of 
the soul. In relation to this, they, in general, appear to 
express very little anxiety. A revival of religion, is a 
thing unknown in their connection. A change of opinion 
in favor of their scheme, is all the conversion they seem to 
wish to produce. With such a change, in connection with 
a common degree of morality, they appear to be entirely 
satisfied. They seem to have no conception of the nature 
and necessity of that, which the Scriptures call " A neiv 
heart." Many of them wholly deny the separate exis- 
ence of the soul. 

The doctrine of materiality is strongly advocated by 
Dr. Priestley, and it seems to be very generally received 
by the Anti-Trinitarian fraternity. By that philosophy, 
there is not an immaterial spirit connected with the body, 
and all mental operations, result from the peculiar modifi- 
cation and organization of mere matter. That system, -of 
course, will lead its adherents to believe, that the mind is 
wholly suspended by death, until the resurrection. It is 
not the design to attempt a confutation of that theory at 
present — that is reserved for a subsequent discussion. It 
is sufficient for my present purpose, just to observe, that 
this philosophy may be one thing, that leads to that reli- 
gious indifference, which seems to pervade the whole An- 
ti-Trinitarian denomination. On this ground, there is no- 
thing to excite either hope or fear, between death and the 
resurrection ; and such impressions may very naturally 
lead to a secret hope, that none of mankind will ever be 
disturbed from the repose of the grave. Be that, however, 
&s it may, it is very obvious that there is but little religious 



OF ANTI-TRINITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 240 

^ng those who believe in the Anti-Trinitarian 
Nho ever heard of one of them asking that so- 
lon, " What shall I do to be saved ?" Who ever 
an inquirer, with an unshaken belief of that doc- 
This would not be the case, if the system had any 
y to produce serious reflections. No one on that 
the question, appears to be burdened with a sense 
ilt, nor with a sense of his need of sovereign mercy, 
alation to eternal concerns, a remarkable ease appears 
every countenance. The preaching of the Apostles 
rtainly produced very different effects on the minds of 
ten. How can this be accounted for, on the supposition 
that the system in question is truly evangelical ? That 
Trinitarian doctrines very frequently move the hearts of 
men, and alter their lives, are facts that cannot be very 
easily denied. But why should falsehood now have such 
an effect as truth once had, and truth be heard at present 
with a cold indifference ? May we not expect similar ef- 
fects under similar causes, in all ages ? This difficulty 
must hang like a dead weight on the Anti- Trinitarian 
system, in the view of impartial observers '? 

Under the preaching of St. Peter, on the day of Pente- 
cost, his numerous audience " were pricked in their heart ;' ? 
three thousand were converted, and added to the church in 
one day. No such seal of heaven has ever been set to the 
preaching of the Anti -Trinitarian theory, in any age. If 
I saw such glorious effects flowing from it, I should not 
venture to oppose the thing. It is really surprising that 
any arguments should be thought necessary to convince 
men, that there is no truth in a system, that is as barren of 
all good fruit as the deserts of Africa ! The finger of God 
is evidently pointed against it in every generation, by re- 
fusing to accompany its promulgation with his blessing. 
It seems, that the simple humanity of Christ, and deny 
1 1 



250 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

ing the Personal existence and renewing operations of the 
Holy Spirit produces no alarm, either on the mind of the 
instructors nor the instructed. All are in profound peace. 
But we need not enlarge ; for the force of these remarks 
must be deeply felt, by this congregation. The appeal is 
made to your eyes, your ears, and your conscience. The 
subject is not a matter of mere speculation — it is of the 
very last importance. 

That the Anti-Trinitarians live in the frigid zone of the 
Christian system, appears very clearly from the following 
observation, made by Dr. Priestley. He says, " It is not 
necessary to dwell in our thoughts on death and futurity, 
lest it should interrupt the business of life, and cause us t© 
live in perpetual bondage." But this forms a grand dis- 
cord with the following Scriptural admonitions ; namely, 
" Prepare to meet thy God." Amos 4. 12. " Boast not 
thyself of to-morrow; for thou knowest what a day may 
bring forth." Prov. 28. 1. "Every one of us shall give 
account of himself to God." Rom. 14. 12. Thus we may 
see, that the Anti-Trinitarian writers are at war with the 
Scriptures, in almost the whole of their communications. 
We are not, therefore, at liberty to hear them, until they 
speak more " according to the law and the testimony." 
Our eternal interest is too precious to be tampered with in 
such a manner. It is acknowledged by Dr. Priestley, 
that " a great number of the Unitarians," as he calls them, 
"" of the present day, are only men of good sense, and with- 
out much practical religion ; and that there is a greater 
conformity to the world in them, than is observable in 
others." It must be allowed, that this was a great deal 
for him to say ; but as to the propriety of it, we readily 
subscribe. 

Thus, when we say, that their system leads them t« 
indifference in relation to iliQ concerns of the soul, it is on 



\ 



OF ANTI-TRINITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 251 

> u?£ in a great degree, admitted. But the necessity 

" concessions, must, I think, have been very 
such an advocate for the Anti-Trinitarian 
s Dr. Priestley. 

cise view may be taken of the plan, as it re- 
; evil of sin. Their thoughts of that, appear to 
^ial to a mournful degree. They seem to see no 
i my other atonement for it, but repentance and re- 
on. According to their arguments, eternal punish- 
es quite disproportioned to the magnitude of that evil, 
rtain writer in the Monthly Review, says, " We are 
her amused nor edified by the corruscations of damna- 
bn; Nor can we, by any means, bring ourselves to think, 
with the late Mr. Edwards, that the vindictive justice of 
God is a glorious attribute." Mr. Belsham says, " If God 
is so severe as to mark every instance of iniquity, we must 
needs consider him as a merciless tyrant, and wish that 
the government of the universe were in better hands." 
They contend, that our virtues are a sufficient satisfaction 
to the justice of God, for all the offences of which we may 
have been guilty. Dr. Priestley says expressly, that " re- 
pentance and a good life, are of themselves sufficient to 
recommend us to the Divine favor." But Mrs. Barbauld 
is more bold than Dr. Priestley. She says, " When a man 
like Dr. Price is about to resign his soul into the hands of 
his Maker, he ought to do it not only with a reliance on 
his mercy, but his justice. It does not become him to pay 
the blasphemous homage of deprecating the wrath of God, 
when he ought to throw himself into the arms of his love." 
This is valuing our supposed virtue at a high calculation ; 
and sinking the evil of sin to a great degree. It is self- 
righteousness without any covering. The complete con- 
trast of this doctrine with the Holy Scriptures, cannot es- 
cape the eye of the most superficial observer. Sin is by 



252 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

no means treated in this extenuating manner in that in- 
spired volume. It informs us, however, that " fools make 
a mock at sin ;" that it is against God ; that it is exceed- 
ingly sinful ; that it is the thing that his soul hateth ; and 
that it is as the poison of a serpent. But the system 
under consideration leads the mind to reduce the number 
of sins, as well as to lessen the magnitude of its evil. It 
leads us to suppose, that the sins of men bear but a small 
proportion to their virtues. Concerning this case, Dr, 
Priestley says, " Virtue bears the same proportion to vice, 
that happiness does to misery, or health to sickness, in 
the world." Is not this judging in our own favor to a 
high degree ? But, if there were no higher tribunal, all 
would be well. We may be assured, however, that the 
Dr.'s opinion will have but little influence on the decisions 
of the great day ; that it will appear as a very incorrect 
calculation, when the secrets of all hearts are developed. 
We obtain no such impressions from the Bible, as the Anti- 
Trinitarian writers arc endeavoring to make on our minds. 
But the unrenewed heart is in great danger of falling in 
with such flesh-pleasing schemes ; and on this account, it 
is highly necessary to administer the most powerful anti- 
dotes against the poison. There is no hope of awakening 
the human mind, while any Anti-Trinitarian impressions 
remain on it. That doctrine is the most fatal anodyne 
that can possibly be administered to immortal souls, labor- 
ing under the disease of sin. The reasonings of such di- 
vines " on righteousness, temperance, and a judgment to 
come," are by no means such as to make sinners tremble. 
Your own observations, my hearers, must have convinced 
you of this, independently of my arguments on the sub- 
ject. You have nothing to do but to open your eyes* to 
see the deep moral sleep into which that theory lulls the 
souls of men. This argument is sufficient to silence all 



OF ANTI-TR1NITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 



their specious reasonings against Trinitarian principles. 
Their fine-spun criticisms on the Sacred Volume, only 
serve to fold their own hands in the slumbers of death, 
May the Lord preserve us from the contagious lethargy, 
and awaken them from their pleasing but fatal delusion, 
Amen, 



SERMON XIX. 



Galatians 4. 17. 
They zealously affect you, but not well 



The evils into which the Anti-Trinitarian doctrines lead 
mankind, have been illustrated in eight particulars. It is 
necessary to recapitulate them, to proceed intelligibly with 
subsequent observations. It has been shown, that the 
theory in question leads those who receive it, to treat the 
Holy Scriptures with an unbecoming freedom ; to deny 
many of their doctrines, and to believe but few ; to have 
wrong conceptions of the Divine character, and the cha- 
racter of men ; to have low conceptions of Christ's charac- 
ter and work; to treat Him with great indifference; to 
disesteem the Orthodox, and oppose them in all their ope- 
rations ; to overlook the momentous concerns of their own 
souls ; and to consider sin rather a misfortune than a 
crime. In proceeding with the subject, it may be observed, 

9. That the system in question leads those who adopt 
it, to have little concern about the salvation of others. As 
to the wicked who are advanced in life, Dr. Priestley 
views their situation as being entirely hopeless. He says, 
" All late repentance, and especially after long and con- 
firmed habits of vice, is altogether and necessarily ineffec- 
tual ; there not being sufficient time left to produce a 



THE MORAL TENDENCY, &C. 255 

change of disposition and character, which can only be 
done by a change of conduct, and of proportionally long 
continuance." This unhappy class of sinners, on Anti- 
Trinitarian principles, must, of course, be given up to 
eternal annihilation, or to the torments of hell, after death, 
for a limited duration. There are, therefore, no sufficient 
motives to labor for their conversion. It would only be 
giving them unnecessary trouble, to address them with 
divine threatenings, or to exhibit promises which can have 
no application to their ruined case. How far the Anti- 
Trinitarians in general agree with their file-leader in this 
matter, I am not prepared to affirm. It appears, how T ever, 
with great clearness, that they are all very careful not to 
disturb the repose of the wicked. In beholding their slum- 
bers, they neither weep nor pray. 

The Anti- Trinitarian doctrine has been preached in this 
town for a series of years, and with a considerable degree 
of zeal and talents. If it is calculated to alarm and con- 
vert sinners, you must, no doubt, have seen these glorious 
fruits of it. But, alas ! the teachers of that system are 
not in the habit of saying to their hearers, " Now then we 
are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech 
you by us : we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled 
to God." 2 Cor. 5. 20. You have never seen, my hearers, 
poor distressed sinners saying to the preachers, or profes- 
sors of that denomination, " Men and brethren, What shall 
we do to be saved ?" It appears to be their grand object, to 
persuade men of the truth of the Anti-Trinitarian system, 
and guard them against Trinitarian idolatry, instead of 
alarming their fears with the infinite evil of sin, or the 
danger of eternal punishment. Under such instructions 
as these, sinners are not impressed with the sense of their 
total depravity ; nor are they led to see the necessity of 
obtaining a new heart, to be obedient to God and prepared 



256 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

for heaven. They find it difficult, however, to convince 
many of the wicked, that their doctrines are Scriptural; 
but if they could only effect this, they would never see, in 
such people, any opposition of heart to Anti-Trinitarian- 
ism. If they can only change people's doctrinal views, 
they seem to be perfectly indifferent as to their present life, 
or future safety. In relation to this matter, Dr. Fuller says, 
Ci Were any of their hearers, by any means, to feel pricked in 
their hearts, and come to them with the question, " What 
shall we do?" would they not pity them as enthusiasts, and 
"be ready to suspect that they had been among the Calvin- 
ists ? If any counsel were given, would it not be such as 
should tend to impede their repentance rather than promote 
it ? and instead of directing them to Jesus Christ, would 
they not endeavor to lead them into another course ?" He 
adds, " Socinian writers cannot so much as pretend, that 
their doctrine has been used to convert profligate sinners to 
the love of God and holiness." 

Trying to remove these difficulties, they have felt them- 
selves under the necessity of mentioning the effects of the 
Apostles' preaching ; which is completely begging the 
point in controversy. In this miserable manner, Dr. Tol- 
man has pretended to refute the powerful letters of Dr. 
Fuller on the moral tendency of the Anti- Trinitarian prin- 
ciples. In reasoning from analogy, we may conclude with 
the utmost safety, that there never will be a religious re- 
vival under Anti- Trinitarian preaching, down to the end 
of time. Such an event would disappoint the teachers 
themselves, and serve to convince them of the fallacy of 
their own system. 

While Dr. Scott continued to preach on that plan, his 
own mind was at rest ; and his hearers slept under the 
soothing sound of his eloquence ; but when he became 
more evangelical, they came to him with the solemn ques- 



of anti-trinitarianism exhibited. 257 

tion, " What shall we do to be saved ?" While he was an 
Anti-Trinitarian, he had no concern for the salvation of 
his people; but after changing his sentiments, he manifes- 
ted great anxiety on that subject; and his preaching and 
writings became extensively useful. You may see the 
propriety of these remarks, by consulting his publication, 
called, " The force of truth." 

The Anti-Trinitarians appear to be greatly engaged in 
spreading their doctrines where the gospel has been pro- 
mulgated ; but in respect to the heathen world, they seem 
to give themselves no trouble. Dr. Fuller says, " Let a 
Kngle instance be produced, of a Socinian teacher having 
so much virtue or benevolence, as to venture among a race 
of barbarians, merely with the view to their conversion." 
In relation to this, one of that class says, " Far better is 
the light.of nature as communicated to them by their Cre- 
ator, than any light our officiousness disposes us to carry 
to them." This writer, undoubtedly, means, the light, or 
rather darkness, of Trinitarianism ; but as the light of na- 
ture is so highly prized by the Anti-Trinitarians, they 
will not, of course, subject themselves to any great self-de- 
nial, to afford the heathen the light of their own doctrines. 
Alas! their scheme does not lead them to weep, when they 
see their fellow-creatures living as the enemies of the cross 
of Christ. Iii vain shall we look among them for such 
feelings towards perishing sinners, as were displayed by 
the Prophets and Apostles. With their present principles, 
they will never be disposed to say, " Knowing, therefore, 
the terror of the Lord, we persuade men." 2 Cor. 5. 11. 
A belief of their system, and external morality, are all that 
they require as pre- requisites to salvation. Their extensive 
charity supercedes the necessity of warning sinners to " flee 
from the wrath to come." They seem to have no great 

fears about the future state of any part of mankind. Their 
Kk 



258 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

ardor in .'spreading their own views, appears to arise from 
opposition to evangelical doctrines, rather than from 
a desire to convert, or reform the world. It seems to irri- 
tate them, to be told, that the case of sinners is at all dan- 
gerous. The mercy of the God whom they adore, is so 
great as wholly to exclude vindictive justice. 

Mr. Belsham says, " If God should mark and punish every 
instance of transgression, he must be a merciless tyrant ;" 
but if he had said, any "instance of transgression," it would 
not have been a very great departure from the Anti-Trini- 
tarian system. It is not to be expected that they will take 
any groat pains to effect the conversion of men, whose con- 
demnation cannot take place, unless God should prove Him- 
self to be cruel. It evidently appears to be the tendency of 
that system, to fortify the minds of sinners against God, 
instead of converting them to his service. It is not won- 
derful that the worst of sinners should feel perfectly easy, 
in hearing such deluding doctrines. It need not be proved 
that their scheme has such a baneful effect on the 
mind ; for the thing admits of no denial. In confirmation 
of this, my hearers, I have only to appeal to your own con- 
science and observation. Did you ever know of souls un- 
der conviction, repairing to such preachers for religious in- 
struction ? Alas ! they know that it would be of very little 
use. But those who are determined to follow the course of 
this world, and at the same time, live in quietness of mind! 
will find in such instructors, all that they can possibly de- 
sire. This manifests, that the doctrine leads to sin and 
endless misery ; and therefore, it must be dreaded by all 
who suitably appreciate the worth of immortal souls. 
But, 

10. The Anti-Trinitari?n system leads those who em- 
brace it, to neglect every branch of practical piety. By 
this, I mean the duties which we owe to God. Men mat 



OF ANTT-TRINITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 259 

sustain what is called a decent moral character, and yet bo 
wholly deficient in relation to practical religion. 

Dr. Fuller very justly says, "A decent conduct has 
been found in hypocrites, in infidels, and even in Atheists." 
It is said by Dr. Priestley himself, " That an Atheist may 
be temperate, good natured, honest, and in the less extend- 
ed sense of the word, a virtuous man." Men, in general, 
have powerful inducements to observe the rules of common 
decency, let their religious sentiments be what they may. 
Practical godliness is of a higher nature, than merely to 
lead a decent life. In regard to the various duties of prac- 
tical piety, our doctrinal principles must have a powerful 
influence. 

Practical religion consists in pious conversation — in 
prayer — in praise — in a holy observance of the Christian 
sabbath — and in a regular observance of the public wor- 
ship of God. If these duties are habitually neglected, 
there is no practical religion. If the Anti-Trinitarian doc- 
trines promote these things, then they are favorable to 
practical religion ; but if they do not, then they are unfa- 
vorable. Practical piety is a visible thing. In relation 
to the duties that have been mentioned, the practice of ev- 
ery denomination lies open to the inspection of the world. 
If the Anti-Trinitarians abound in such godliness, every 
insinuation to the contrary must be the effect of prejudice, 
malignity and slander. But it is a very general impres- 
sion, that the people in view, are habitually deficient in all 
the solemn duties which have been mentioned. What all 
the Trinitarian writers have said on this subject, appears 
to be actually true, as far as I have been able to extend my 
observations. The thing, in fact, is so obvious, that their 
own authors have found themselves under the necessity of 
admitting it. 

The Rev. J. Yates, the antagonist of Mr. Wardlaw, 
seems to have anticipated with some degree of pain, that 



°260 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

many of those people in Scotland, who would probably 
embrace the Anti- Trinitarian principles, would " be men 
more inclined to inquire after truth, than to apply it stea- 
dily to practice when found." His fears seem to have 
been great, lest this should operate against the triumphs of 
the cause in that nation* 

It is expressly acknowledged by Dr. Priestley, that " a 
great number of the Unitarians," as he calls them, "'of the 
present age, are only men of good sense, and without 
much practical religion ; and that there is a greater appa- 
rent conformity to the world in them, than is observable 
in others." 

Mr. Belsham also says, that " Rational Christians are 
often represented as indifferent to practical religion." Nei- 
ther does he appear to deny the justness of the charge ; 
but he endeavors to account for it, in a consistency with 
the truth and purity of their doctrines. Dr. Priestley does 
the same. 

The writers of that school freely acknowledge, that 
practical Christians are not in a favorable situation to be- 
come Anti- Trinitarians. Dr. Priestley says, " Many of 
those who judge so truly concerning particular tenets in 
religion, have attained to that cool, unbiassed temper of 
mind, in consequence of becoming more indifferent to re- 
ligion in general, and to all the modes and doctrines of it." 
Mr. Belsham concurs in this opinion, by saying, " Men 
who are the most indifferent to the practice of religion, 
will ever be the first to see the absurdity of a popular su- 
perstition, and to embrace a rational system of faith." 
These concessions very fully prove the point which I am 
endeavoring to prove and illustrate. These champions of 
Anti-Triuitarianism, you see, have unequivocally admitted, 
that an entire absence of religion is the best preparative for 
a conversion to their cause. Such irreligious characters 



OF ANTI-TRINITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 261 

Would not be willing to embrace the system, if they thought 
it at all favorable to practical piety. Seeing the point 
under consideration is allowed by the most able and zealous 
men of that party, and its truth is so obvious to all, we 
cannot be justly blamed for mentioning the thing — a thing 
on their part explicitly acknowledged. 

Anti-Trinitarianism was very early planted in this town. 
It has spread to a considerable extent ; and, therefore, you 
have had a fair opportunity to witness its practical effects 
on the hearts and lives of its admirers. As men, as neigh- 
bors, as members of society, they are, in general, very re- 
spectable ; but I have not been able to discover in them 
much of that, which properly falls under the definition of 
practical religion. But if they are, in general, in the habit 
of conversing on solemn subjects in a serious manner ; if 
they abound much in prayer and in praise ; if they are 
strict observers of the holy Sabbath ; if their attention to 
public worship is general and unremitting ; these things 
must have fallen under your observation ; and, of course, 
my remarks can have but little influence on your opinion. 
If their system were truly evangelical, it would, undoubt- 
edly, produce these effects in some degree. But where 
these virtues are not found, there can be no religion in the 
heart. We must take these things into view, in forming 
a judgment concerning the expediency of embracing or 
rejecting that theory. From the statements of our writers, 
the concessions of theirs, and our own observations, we 
may 7 be now prepared to decide on the question. If Anti- 
Trinitarian doctrine is not productive of practical piety, 
we must conclude that it is not the Gospel of Christ. On 
the tendency of that plan, as it relates to public worship, 
Dr. Fuller says, " Where the Socinian and Arian doctrines 
have been taught, the congregations are gradually dwindling 
away, and there are scarcely a sufficient number left to keep 



262 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

up the form of public worship." He says further, " There 
is nothing in either of these systems that alarms the heart ; 
and, therefore, the congregations where they are taught, un- 
less kept up by the accidental popularity of a preacher, or 
some other circumstance distinct from the doctrine delivered, 
generally fall into decay." We are constantly witnessing, 
my hearers, similar effects of that scheme, in relation to 
public and family worship. Its effects, as to inward de- 
votion, the judgment day must declare. As sufficient has 
been said to sustain the point in hand, we may proceed to 
an 

IMPROVEMENT. 
1. From what has been said on this subject, we may 
see, that we have no inducement to change our present 
principles for Anti-Trinitarianism. That people, we know, 
choose to be distinguished from other denominations, by 
the name of Unitarians ; but to that distinctive appella- 
tion, they have no exclusive right. The import of it is, 
believers in one God; but the name as justly belongs to 
us as to them. The difference between us has no refe- 
rence to the number of Gods ; but to the maimer of the 
Divine Existence. As to the Unity of God, we have no 
disagreement with them. They, however, seem to labor 
greatly to make a different impression on the minds of the 
less informed part of men. When they have proved that 
there is but one Gad, and that Jesus Christ is a man, they 
appear to triumph — to take it for granted that we are con- 
futed ! But, to think of maintaining their cause, by pro- 
ving points that we not only admit but vindicate, amounts 
to nothirg but the blinding of the uninformed. Let them 
prove that there is no Personality in the Essence or nature 
of JEHOVAH, and that the Son and the Holy Ghost 
have no proper claim to Supreme Divinity, and then they 
will effect something to their purpose. But to think of 



GF ANTI-TRINITARIANTSM EXHIBITED. 263 

proving these things from the Scriptures, lias always ap- 
peared to me as an idle undertaking. We are willing to 
admit, that people who dare to attempt this, are by no 
means deficient in courage. It is very necessary that they 
should be highly accomplished in critical learning ; and 
that they should possess the art of evasion to a great degree. 

In reviewing the subject, I think we may rest satisfied 
that Anti-Trinitarian doctrines are unscriptural — not a- 
dapted to the case of mankind — not of a very animating 
moral tendency — arid can never commend themselves to 
the consciences of men, nor to the approbation of God. 
They will never satisfy the mind that has a proper sense 
of the Divine character — of the infinite evil of sin, and 
man's desert of eternal punishment. 

An inspired writer says, " Salvation is not of works ; 
lest any man should boast;" Eph. 2. 9 ; but in direct op- 
position to this, an Anti-Trinitarian writer says, " All hopes 
founded on any thing else than a good moral life, are mere- 
ly imaginary, and contrary to the whole tenor of the gos- 
pel. The absolute manner in which they contradict the 
decided testimony of the Holy Scriptures, is truly surpris- 
ing. But sufficient specimens of this have been exhibited, 
in the preceding sermons on this interesting controversy. 

2. From what has been said on this subject, we may 
see, that the radical errors, held by our opponents, are 
w r holly inconsistent with the Christian name. This point 
has been fully established by the Rev. R. Wordlaw, and 
Dr. Fuller. The views of the Anti-Trinitarians, of Christ 
and the Scriptures, differ but very little from the concep- 
tions of the Deists and Mahomedans.* But as Christ is 

* In the war against Christianity, the French infidels considered the So- 
cinians as their worthy allies. They knew that Socinianisui led directly to 
Deism ; and that, in fact, many of those persons who called themselves Socl- 
nians, were already Deists. Hence, Voltaire says to the King of Prussia, or- 



264 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

really the Supreme God, He can never acknowledge that 
class of men to be His disciples, whose system reduces 
Him to the humble level of a mere man. Neither can we, 
while we retain our belief of His proper Divinity, ac- 
knowledge that people to be our brethren in the Lord, 
who openly deny the doctrine — deny that, which forms 
the very glory of his character. We hold it to be utterly 
impossible, for any real Christian to maintain such princi- 
ciples. It is taking away the very foundation stone on 
which Zion is erected. I am not afraid to say, that there 
is not one in a thousand, of the Orthodox, who would dif- 
fer with me in this opinion. Wherefore then, should I be 
thought peculiarly rigid, in this plain, but honest declara- 
tion? I am no. more censorious in this case, than all the 
ministers and members of our churches are, who fully be- 
lieve in the Trinitarian doctrines. Anti-Trinitarianism has 
been considered as a grand heresy, by the Orthodox, in 
every age. I have been informed, that Dr. Mason of 
New-York, in his plea for open communion, among the 
different Christian denominations, has entirely excluded 
them. 

Notwithstanding the errors, into which, we believe the 
Catholic Church to have fallen, she has not so completely 
departed from the faith, as those, who glory, in calling 
themselves Unitarians. She admits the Trinity in Unity — 
the Deity of Christ— His Atonement, and the sanctifying 
operations of the Holy Ghost. As she has has not entire- 
ly overturned the foundation of the Christian hope, no 
doubt, many of her members, in all ages, have been the 

the 8th ]\ T ov. 1773, " What vexes me, is, that you do not establish a Socinian 
church, after having appointed several for the Jes jits. There 'are Socinians 
still to be met with in 2'oland ; they swarm in England ; and we have some 
of them in Switzerland. Julian would certainly have favored thrm. They 
hate that which he hated ; they despise that which he despised ; and they, 
like him, are worth v men." See Amiinian and Methodist Magazine, page 
S'W.—lCommukuted by a friend.] 






OF ANTI-TRINITIRIANISM EXHIBITED. 265 

sons of God. I have read of some in that church, whose 
piety has appeared to be pure and eminent. Some stars 
have always shone in that hdrizon, notwithstanding the 
clouds, with which it has been obscured. Names might 
be mentioned, if it were necessary, which have reflected 
honor on the Christian cause. 

It is not my desire to be considered as an apologist for 
the church of Rome ; but merely to show, that it is possible 
for real Christians to subsist in that communion ; while, I 
can see no ground, on which, to form such an opinion in 
favor of the Anti -Trinitarians. This is my judgment ex- 
pressed withoiit the least unkind feelings, to the Anti-Trin- 
itarian denomination. Nothing is further from my heart, 
than a wish, wantonly to wound the feelings of any of my 
fellow- creatures. If I could be kind to them, and faithful 
to the cause of Christ, without expressing an opinion on 
the subject, that method would be readily adopted. This 
frank and solemn declaration will, in all probability, not 
be believed by them ; and therefore, the matter must be 
submitted to the day of judgment. Every unkind expres- 
sion of their's, I hope cheerfully to forgive ; and I desire, 
if I know my own heart, their best interest in time and 
eternity. Their feelings and mine, are known to God, at 
whose bar, an account must be given of all our ways. 

In relation to the Universalists, whose case has been men- 
tioned, they stand on the same footing with the Anti-Trini- 
tarians, as to piety. That class of them who are on the plan 
of a limited future punishment, differ but very little from 
the Anti-Trinitarians, except in the name which they have 
assumed. The other class of Universaliaris, differ from 
them both, as to the Person and Atonement of Christ ; but 
they manifest great opposition of heart to the execution of 
divine justice, in respect to those who appear to die in sin 
Their case, as to true religion, is something doubtful, to 
L L 



266 THE MORAL TENDENCY 

say the least of it. We have no right to consider any of 
these denominations, as the Churches of Christ : nor' any 
of their members, as born of the Spirit. No other sect of 
professing Christians, that I know of, have so completely 
departed from the faith. 

3. From what has been said on this subject, we see the 
importance of guarding against doctrines, which subvert 
the Christian system. Every possible step should be ta- 
ken, that appeal's to be adapted to preserve our families 
and fellow-men, from such contagious principles ; and we 
should also strive to reclaim those who are ensnared by 
them, in the spirit of meekness. As to this matter, St. 
Paul says, " The servant of the Lord must not strive ; but 
be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness 
instructing those that oppose themselves ; if God perad- 
venture will give them repentance to the acknowledging 
of the truth." 2 Tim. 2. 24, 25. " Thou shalt love thy 
neighbor as thyself" certainly includes them, on whose 
sentiments these animadversions have been made. A faith- 
ful exhibition of divine truth, is the best token of real 
friendship. To say, that no sentiments are dangerous, if 
sincerely believed, is contrary to these inspired words 
"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits, 
whether they are of God : because many false prophets 
are gone out into the world." 1 John 4. 1. Our Lord 
saith of them, " If it were possible they would deceive the 
very elect." Matth. 24. 24. The only .ground of hope 
is, the preserving care of God— that he can "recover those 
out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by 
him at his will." 2 Tim. 2. 26. He hath a mighty arm ; 
and his grace is rich and free. 

In closing the subject, I would just remark, that I have 
pursued it, more from a conviction of duty, than a desire 
of controversy ; for the very foundation of our hope is in 



OF ANTI-TRINITARIANISM EXHIBITED. 267 

volved in the doctrines which have been contested. The 
debate commenced on the authenticity of a single passage : 
but it is the doctrine contained in it, that engaged the op- 
position of the gentleman on the other side, and called 
from me the discourses which you have heard. The 
whole is now submitted to your candid judgment, and the 
divine blessing. 

" Prove all things ; hold fast that which is good ;" so 
" an abundant entrance shall be administered unto you, 
into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ." 
Amen. 



SERMON XX. 



ECCLESIASTES XII. 7. 

Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was : and the 
spirit shall return to God who gave it. 



The words that are now selected as the theme, express, 
with great clearness, a doctrine of vast importance ; name- 
ly, that man is composed of two constituent par v ts — body 
and spirit. It is surprising that men, who profess to re- 
nounce the Scriptures, should have the temerity to deny 
the fact. It is, however, the case ; and it is our lot in di- 
vine providence, to live among them. 

I should be greatly wanting in my duty to you, my 
hearers, in not exposing such an error ; or in not vindica- 
ting the opposite doctrine. 

I have been recently perusing a production, from the 
pen of the celebrated Dr. Priestley, on the subject of mat- 
ter and spirit, which has led my mind to an investigation 
of the point. Dr. Hartley's theory of the human mind, 
new modelled by Priestley, has likewise fallen under my 
review. The grand object of that acute writer, in these 
fruits of his pen, appears to be, the denial of the possibility 
of the existence of spirits. He labors hard to prove that 
all mental operations, result from the peculiar modification 
of mere matter, 



THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED, &C. 269 

In reflecting on the writings which have been mention- 
ed, my mind is impressed with these apostolical expres- 
sions, " Professing themselves to be wise, they became 
fools." Rom. 1. 22. " The world by wisdom knew not 
God." 1 Cor. 1. 21. " Beware lest any man spoil you 
through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of 
men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." 
Gal. 2. 8. But, in relation to this interesting subject, 
" We have a more sure word of prophecy, to which we do 
well to take heed, as to a light that shineth in a dark place." 
2 Pet. 1. 19. 

The text, that is our theme, leads directly to the point 
in question — the constituent parts of which we are com- 
posed. The dust, which returns to the earth, is the body, 
and the Spirit, that returns to God, is the accountable and 
never-dying soul, It is unequivocally asserted in the text, 
that we are mortal in the one part of our nature, and im- 
mortal in the other. As to the material and mortal part 
of man, there is very little dispute ; and therefore, we need 
not waste the time in attending to it. 

It will be the definite object in the sequel, to prove, 

THAT MEN POSSESS AN IMMATERIAL AND 
IMMORTAL SOUL, DISTINCT FROM THE 
BODY. 

In proving and illustrating this proposition, we may -ob- 
serve, 

1. That the thing is certainly a possibility. But Dr. Priest- 
ley thinks that he has established the reverse on philoso- 
phical principles. The chief thing that he has done, how- 
ever, is, boldly asserting that there is no common property 
between matter and spirit, whereby they can subsist toge- 
ther, and reciprocally affect each other. But this is en- 
deavoring to prove a point that is far above the reach of 
human intellect. It is but little that we can know of God 



270 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED 

or His works, independently of Divine Revelation. As 
there are mysteries in the visible world which transcend 
our comprehension, we are not prepared to pronounce, 
with any degree of certainty, what is possible or impossible, 
in relation to the existence and operations of spirit. Men 
of science know many things to be true, which children 
consider as impossibilities ; and the capacities of such men 
are less in comparison with higher intelligences, than 
children's minds are to theirs. If matter and spirit cannot 
be combined in a single being, it is a thing only known to 
God ; and, therefore, we have no right to assume the opi- 
nion of its being an absurdity, unless it is said so to be by 
Him who knoweth all things. To think of deciding on a 
point of this nature by our feeble reason, is surely more 
than wild. It is like an attempt to span the heavens, or 
to comprehend the ocean in the hollow of our hand ! The 
specious reasoning of the philosophic Priestley, on this 
subject, is of no more value than the opinion of the weak- 
est man on earth. If we had nothing to guide us in this 
case, but the mere light of nature, his arguments might de- 
serve some attention. With all the plausibility of such 
arguments, that philosophy is denied by many, on the 
ground of abstract reasoning. But no one can prove the 
impossibility of a thing which is made absolutely certain. 
That this is the case in relation to the immateriality of the 
soul, will be made, we hope, to appear. 

2. The theory of man's materiality, is discarded by men 
whose science is not inferior to that of Dr. Joseph Priestley. 
Many distinguished philosophers, ancient and modern, 
have vindicated, on the ground of reason, the separate ex- 
istence and immortality of the soul. When the Doctor 
thought that he had established the position, that matter 
may be so modified as to perform all the operations of 
mind, he draws the conclusion, that the addition of an im- 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISM. 271 

material spirit would be an unnecessary appendage ; that 
sound philosophy forbids the assigning of more causes than 
are necessary to produce an effect. Bat his grand position, 
that matter may be so modified as to perform the opera- 
tions of mind, is denied ; and he has no right to take a 
thing for granted, that requires proof. Unless the premises 
are established, the conclusions arising from them have no 
weight. The entire materiality of man, would be a proof 
of his complete mortality, and evince the impossibility of 
his having any consciousness after death. But if the soul 
is immaterial and distinct from the body, then he may, in 
that part of his nature, exist in a separate state. Believers 
in the immortality of the soul, universally consider it as a 
thing wholly distinct from matter. 

In fact, if mental operations are nothing but the result 
of material organization, it will go far in proving that no 
spirits exist in the universe. On that principle, God Him- 
self must be a material Being ; and that would establish 
at once the Atheistical doctrine, that God is every thing, 
and every thing is God. This ground, therefore, must be 
taken in the argument, that matter, in whatever way it 
may be modified, cannot perform the operations of an in- 
telligent being. No ; reason is a power too vast and sub- 
lime, to have no other essence but corporality ! Mere 
earth, however curiously modified it might be, could never 
soar above its own nature and origin ; but the soul of man 
thirsts after immortality. Some of the learned heathen 
have reasoned admirably on the point in question ; and 
have defended, with consummate ability, the immortality 
of the human mind. This was the case of the learned 
and penetrating Plato. When the celebrated Cato was 
just about to commit the detestable act of suicide, the his- 
toric page says, that he held Plato's philosophy in the one 
hand, and the fatal sword in the other. Looking at the 



272 THE IMMORTAEITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED 

sword, he says, " This will put an end to my life ;" but 
viewing the book, he cries, " That assures me that I shall 
never die !" He then pronounced, with emphasis, " It 
must be so, Plato, thou reasonest well ; else, why this pleas- 
ing hope, this fond desire, this longing after immortality ? 5J 
Many scholars, more acute, more deeply versed in science, 
than Dr. Priestley, have opposed the theory of the soul's 
materiality ; and have defended the opposite hypothesis, 
with arguments more numerous and powerful than he has 
adduced in favor of his philosophy. From these conside- 
rations w r e may conclude, that the thing is not only possi- 
ble, but highly probable, on the mere ground of reason. 
Even on philosophical principles, we may entertain more 
elevated views of man, than that of being only a material 
and mortal creature. If that were really true, we might, 
with great propriety, hesitate concerning his existing any 
more after death. The doctrine of materialism is such a 
near approximation to Atheism, that it cannot be viewed 
without the deepest horror. Tne Anti-Trinitarians say, 
indeed, that there will be a resurrection ; but another sect 
may soon arise in that school, informing the world, that 
the passages which support that doctrine are all interpola- 
tions and corrupt readings, and form no part of the original 
Scriptures. In doing so, they will not be more heretical 
in respect to them, than they themselves are now in relation 
to us. 

3. The general opinion of mankind has always been in 
opposition to the materiality and consequent mortality of 
man. Selecting that part of men who have enjoyed the 
Scriptures, the principle in question has not been believed 
by one of a hundred. There was a small sect among the 
Jews, who said, " There is no resurrection, neither angels 
nor spirits ;" and in the Christian church, there have, in 
various ages, been a few of such an infidel turn of thinking. 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISM. 273 

It must be allowed, we grant, that truth is not always on 
the side of the multitude ; but a point which few have ever 
believed, should be thoroughly examined before it is adopt- 
ed as an article of our creed. There is a strong bias in 
the minds of some people, to adopt any theory that is new, 
when exhibited by a popular character ; and many others 
are highly tenacious of doctrines which have antiquity in 
their favor. These extremes are equally dangerous ; and 
to run into either of them, is* an indication of a weak and 
injudicious mind. 

But with regard to the overwhelming number who have 
always been in the belief of the soul's immortality, it is 
proper to remark, that they have not been the rabble, the 
unthinking, the uninformed, nor the vicious. If such 
people have believed the doctrine, it has been through the 
influence of the enlightened and virtuous. Yes ; those 
who have given weight and currency to this belief, in ge- 
neral, have been men who have made religion their serious 
object ; men, whose character, candor, learning, natural 
abilities, patient investigation, and apparent piety, have 
entitled them to respect ; and, therefore, their opinions 
claim our deference* Not to admit this fact as being an 
argument in favor of the point in question, is an evidence 
of a mind wedded to its own notions. 

The heathen world, in general, have always had some 
crude ideas of this doctrine. But being destitute of the 
Scriptures, they have never had any knowledge of the 
resurrection ; yet they have had some expectations of fu- 
ture rewards and punishments ; and that is a manifesta- 
tion of their belief in the immateriality and incorruptibility 
of the soul. If the principle is as contrary to Scripture 
and reason, as Dr. Priestley pretends, how came it to pre- 
vail over all the earth, and in all ages ?" 

The immortality of the soul, and the being of God 
Mm 



274 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED 

were, undoubtedly, revealed to man at the creation ; and 
some faint impressions of these tilings have remained on 
their minds, through all the past generations. Wnen such 
impressions are once made, they are not very easily remo- 
ved. 

Dr. Priestley considers it as ah argument in his favor # 
that the ancients, in speaking of the soul as being distinct 
from the body, have, notwithstanding, always spoken of it 
as being, in some sense, a material substance. This, un- 
doubtedly, arose from their intimate acquaintance with 
matter, and the necessary obscurity of their ideas, in re- 
lation to the nature, or essence of a spirit. In condescen- 
tion to our senses, God speak s of Himself in the Scriptures, 
as if He were a material Being. He is said to have 
hands, eyes, ears, and such properties about Him, as would, 
in some measure, convey the idea of corporality. But to 
suppose that He is not a pure and immaterial Essence,, 
would argue the highest degree of mental imbecility. 

When Dr. Priestly speaks of spirit, he resolves it into 
mere matter, and when he treats on matter, it all appears 
to be resolved into that which is merely ideal. In one 
word, his whole system seems to be scepticism. It must 
be allowed, that our knowledge of the real essence, either 
of matter or spirit, is very obscure ; but from their separ- 
ate properties, we may infer their existence, and widely dif- 
ferent natures, 

I am willing to admit, however, that all the evidence that 
has been mentioned in favor of the separate existence of the 
soul, and its immortality, is wholly insufficient to settle the 
question. But there is certainly as much of that kind of 
evidence to which Dr. Priestly resorts, against him, as there 
is in his favor ; and many able reasoners would say, 
much more. He has, indeed, resorted to the Scriptures, 
for the defence and illustration of his principles. But it. 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISM. 275 

is a singular appeal, and it is curiously conducted by this 
philosophic Doctor. He refers to such passages only, as 
are indefinite in their import ; — and, therefore, being equiv- 
ocal, he has given them a plausible construction — the ap- 
pearance of being in his favor. As for those passages 
which are definite, and manifestly against his scheme, he 
does not even deign to mention them. He settles them at 
one bold stroke ; — namely, That the Bible is so interlar- 
ded wirh foreign matter, that no reliance can be placed on 
it, until it is criticised, and puriiied by giants, like himself, 
in Biblical literature. In a word, he seems to consider 
his own plan as being absolutely settled on philosophical 
principles ; and, of course, those parts of Scripture which 
hold an opposite language, must have been corrupted* 
His own philosophy, therefore, is with him the standard, 
and the Scriptures must bow to its decisions. But see- 
ing philosophers against philosophers — learned men against 
learned men — critics against critics, we must resort to the 
Scriptures as our only safe guide, in the investigation of 
this subject; believing that they are not corrupted, and that 
they are fully adequate to settle the momentous question, 
Therefore, 

4. We shall proceed to collect evidence from them, in 
favor of the proposition which was deduced from the text ; 
namely, that men possess an immaterial spirit, which is 
immortal, and distinct from the body. It is, we acknowl- 
edge, but an obscure idea that we can have of the essence., 
or substance of a spirit; but we may understand its properties, 
and perceive their difference from the properties of matter. 
If man is nothing but a material substance, so modified as 
to be capable of intellectual operations ; it must follow, that 
the Divine Spirit can effect no change in his moral character, 
only by the exhibition of motives, or an alteration in the tex- 
ture, or organization of his frame. The opinion in question 



276 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL 'SUPPORTED 

is therefore, at war with the doctrine of regeneration, as it is 
taught in the Scriptures. If all the passages which teach 
the Trinity in Unity— -the Deity of Christ — his Atone- 
ment — the Personality and Deity of the Holy Ghost — the 
entire depravity of man — the immateriality and immortali- 
ty of the soul — -the doctrine of regeneration, fee. are for- 
geries, our Bible must be so completely corrupted , that it is 
now of no real value. But it is sufficient for us, that the 
Bible teaches all the doctrines that have been mentioned. 
We are there taught, that the soul and body are distinct 
in essence, and that they constitute a single complex person. 
It is nothing less than infidelity, to deviate in the least de- 
gree from this view of the subject. 

By the immateriality of the soul, we mean, that it is a 
substance, to us unknown, wholly different from that 
which is material. \t is a substance, in distinction from 
non-entity ; and it is called a spirit in contradistinction 
from unconscious matter. This difference is clearly mark- 
ed in our text — namely, " Then shall the dust return to 
the earth as it was, and the spirit shall return to God who 
gave it." If these words are not spurious — and Iknow 
of no such charge against them-^-they establish the soul's 
immortality and separate existence. But this doctrine is 
strongly corroborated by many other sacred passages. 
Some that are most clear and forcible, will now be select- 
ed. Every passage that speaks of the soul as being immor- 
tal, and existing in a separate state, proves that it is a sub- 
stance differing from mere matter, whatever that substance 
may be, and whether we have or have not a correct con- 
ception of that essence or nature. As people have such a 
strong propensity to evade the force of words, and to give 
them a construction foreign to their proper import, no texts 
will he adduced, but such as are perfectly unequivocal. 

The passage Which is chosen for the foundation of this 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISM. 277 

subject, is evidently of this kind. In relation to the ma- 
terial part, Solomon says, that man has but little pre-emi- 
nence over the brutal creation ; as they " all go to one 
place ; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again." 
Eccl. 3. 20. But as to the other part of our nature, he 
tells us, that the difference is vast between us and the 
brutes-— they being mortal, and we immortal. He says, 
i; Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and 
the spirit of a beast that goeth downward to the earth." 
Verse 21. His words clearly shew, that the nature of 
these different spirits is beyond our comprehension ; but 
that the one is immortal and the other not — -that the one is 
accountable to God, the other has no concern in future re- 
sponsibility. These two passages are sufficient alone, to 
overset the whole of Dr. Priestley's theory, and every ar- 
gument on which it is founded. 

In reference to this doctrine, Elihu says to Job, "But 
there is a spirit in man : and the inspiration of the Almigh- 
ty giveth them understanding." Job 32. 8. In perfect 
harmony with this grand sentiment, the prophet Zechariah 
says, " The Lord stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth 
the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man 
within him." Zech. 12. 1. These passages are incon- 
testible proofs, that the spirit and body of man are distinct 
things. Say not like INicodemus, " How can these things 
be?" when God hath assured us of their reality. But it 
is needless to multiply testimonies of this kind, for the Scrip- 
tures abound with them. We shall proceed, therefore, to 
advance some unequivocal passages in support of the soul's 
immortality, and existence between death and the resur- 
rection. The first that will be mentioned, is that conclu- 
sive passage, recorded in Exodus 3. 6, where the Lord 
saith unto Moses, " I am the God of thy fathers, the God 
of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'" 



278 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED 

Christ quoted this passage, to confute the infidelity of the 
Sadducees, in relation to. the doctrine of the resurrection, 
and to establish the immortality of the soul. The conclu- 
sion which He drew from it, is irresistible; namely, that 
t ose venerable Patriarchs were then in existence ; for Je- 
hovah " is not the God of the dead, but of the living." 

But as the souFs immortality is more clearly revealed 
in the New-Testament, we will resort to it for further light 
on the subject. 

It is stated in the Old-Testament, that Moses died on 
" the top of Pisgah ;" and that the Lord " buried him in a 
valley in the land of Moab ;" yet, we are told by the Evan- 
gelist, that he appeared with Elias, or Elijah, on the mount, 
where our Saviour was so gloriously transfigured. It was, 
undoubtedly, the soul of Moses that appeared ; for his 
body was in the grave. His soul, therefore, existed sep- 
arately, from his death, until that period. He appeared 
to possess intelligence, as really as the translated Elijah ; 
and was equally capable of conversing with Christ, on the 
subject of the sufferings which were before Him, with all 
the glorious and eternal consequences of them. It must be 
allowed, therefore, that Moses exists now, in the most noble 
part of his nature. As he is evidently dead, and yet exis- 
ting in a separate state, the immortality of the soul is fully 
established. Some collateral testimony, however, will be 
added to this argument. 

When the pious Stephen was expiring under the hands 
of his enemies, he prayed thus, " Lord Jesus, receive my 
spirit." Acts 7. 59. This is a manifestation, that he did 
not believe himself to consist of nothing but matter ; nor 
that he was falling asleep, to wake no more, until the res- 
urrection. His prayer was, undoubtedly, heard ; and it is 
recorded by inspiration, to convince men of their immor 
tality, as it respects the souL 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISM* 279 

The case mentioned by our Lord, of the rich man and 
Lazarus, is decisive evidence of the soul's immortality. 
He says, that Lazarus " died, and was carried by the an- 
gels into Abraham's bosom:" — adding, " The rich man 
also died, and was buried : and in hell he lifted up his eyes, 
being in torments." Luke 16. 32, 33. On the hypothe- 
sis under consideration, this statement must be incorrect; 
for if neither the rich man nor Lazarus had souls, in dis- 
tinction from their bodies, the one is not in happiness, nor 
the other in misery — they are both sleeping in the grave 
in equal peace. The question to be settled, is simply 
this, Which is the standard, Dr. Priestley's theory of mat- 
ter and spirit, or the Holy Scriptures ? According to 
Priestley, the. rich man and Lazarus have no conscious- 
ness of any thing at present; but according to the Scrip- 
tures, the one is in heaven, and the other in hell ! It is 
surely to be lamented, that this pre-eminent philosopher 
had not lived in the days of Jesus Christ, that he might 
have given Him the important information, that intelli- 
gence is only a property of matter duly organized, and 
that after death there can be no consciousness, until the 
resurrection ! ! ! It certainly appears that Christ was a be- 
liever in the unphilosophical doctrine of the soul's immor- 
tality ; for when the dying thief said to Him on the cross, 
" Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy king- 
dom," He replied, " Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt 
thou be with me in paradise." Luke 23. 42, 43. There 
is no need of saying any thing on the weight of this tes- 
timony ; for the subject is perfectly clear, unless Dr. Priest- 
ley knows more about man, than the God who created 
him! 

In this view of things, I think, that if any of my hear- 
ers are still disposed to lean to that system, which is ca! 
led Unitarianism, their credulity must be great! My 






280 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED 

heart sickens at the thought of being laid under the neces- 
sity of making these remarks. But as Providence has 
placed me where such heretical doctrines are inculcated, 
your preservation from them, requires that plainness which 
is painful to my feelings. In pursuing the argument, 

It may be further observed, that St. Paul, who was a 
man of great natural abilities — a consummate scholar, and 
inspired of God, believed fully in the immortality of the 
soul, and in its separate existence from the body. It was 
on this ground he said to the Philippians; "For me to 
live is Christ, and to die is gain. — I am in a strait be- 
twixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ ; 
which is far better : nevertheless, to abide in the flesh is more 
needful for you." Phil. 1. 21 — 24. In another epistle he 
says, "For we know that if our earthly house of this ta- 
bernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an 
house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For 
in this We groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon 
with our house which is from heaven : if so be that being 
clothed we shall not be found naked. For we who are 
in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened : not that we 
would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might 
be swallowed up of life.-— Therefore we are always con- 
fident, knowing that whilst we are at home in the body, 
we are absent from the Lord— for we walk by faith, not 
by sight ; we are confident, I say, and willing r.,ther to 
be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord." 
2 Cor. 5. 1—6. In his epistle to the Hebrews, he speaks 
of " the spirits of just men made perfect." Heb. 12. 2o. 
St. Paul, therefore, was not initiated into the Priestleyan 
philosophy, concerning the entire materiality of man, and 
his complete mortality between death and the resurrection. 
This depth in science was not fathomed in the age of in* 
spiration ! The sun of philosophy had not risen then 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISM. 281 

above the moral horizon, so as to dispel the mist of inspi- 
ration, and illuminate the human mind ! 

It seems that the apostle Peter, was in the same dark- 
ness, in which his brother Paul was involved ; for he says 
to the churches, " I think it meet, as long as I am in this 
tabernacle, to stir you up by way of remembrance ; know- 
ing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as 
our Lord Jesus Christ hath showed me." 2. Pet 1. 13, 
14. The harmony of these apostles, on the immortality 
of the soul, is great; and their expressions about it are so 
clear, that no comment is necessary. 

The account which St. John gives of the glorified souls 
of the ancient martyrs, is an additional testimony to the 
doctrine in question. I shall rest the argument on what 
has been said, being fully satisfied, that the candid enquirer 
must be convinced. This sublime and interesting subject 
will be improved in the next discourse, May God bless 
the word of eternal truth. Amen. 



N 



SERMON XXI. 



ECLESIASTES XII. 7. 

Then shall the dust return to the earth as it icas : and the 
spirit shall return to God who gave it. 



In the former discourse, on these words, the object was 
to support and illustrate this proposition ; namely, 
THAT MEN POSSESS AN IMMATERIAL AND 
IMMORTAL SOUL, DISTINCT FROM THE 
BODY. 

It has been very clearly shown, that the soul of man is 
capable of existing separately from the body ; and that it 
can exist in union with it, forming a complex person. On 
philosophical principles, we have seen, that there is as 
much, if not more, evidence in favor of this doctrine, than 
can be exhibited in defence of the opposite theory : and 
that in the word of God, the subject is completely settled. 
There is no room, therefore, to doubt, unless our minds 
are prepared to reject all revealed religion. Such a fatal 
stand is not yet, I sincerely hope, taken by any one of this 
respectable congregation. 

In conformity to a previous promise, I must now close 
the subject with an 

IMPROVEMENT. 
I. If it has been proved that we possess immaterial and 
immortal souls, we must have a more exalted idea of man r 



THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED, &C. 283 

than we can have on the theory of his entire materiality. 
According to that, we are nothing but earth ; and of course 
we must be altogether sensual in our affections. Nor can 
We be consistently blamed for not soaring in our thoughts 
above the level of our own nature and origin. The sys- 
tem of materialism, lays man very low ; much lower, per- 
haps, than the brutal creation. It can hardly be thought 
that mere matter would be capable of their operation and 
sagacity. It cannot be easily doubted, but that they pos- 
sess an immaterial spirit, as well as man. It is thought by 
some, that it is immortal ; and that the beasts will have a 
place assigned to them in another world, suited to their na- 
tures and capacities. But, perhaps, this is vibrating to the 
opposite extreme of materialism ; and it may be equally 
incorrect. Neither of these theories appear to have the 
countenance of the Scriptures, which are our only guide 
on the subjects in question. He who formed the spirits of 
beasts/ may annihilate them, whenever the purpose for 
which they were formed is answered. This seems to be 
the meaning of these inspired words, " Who knoweth — 
the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth.' 5 
Eccl. 3. 21. The human soul possesses rationality, and, 
therefore, it is an accountable spirit. Hence JEHO- 
VAH saith, " The soul that sinneth, it shall die." EzeL 
18. 4. Neither the threatenings of future punishment, 
nor the promises of glory to come, have any relation to 
the brutal creation — they have nothing to hope or fear af- 
ter death. The case is very different with man. No 
scheme of doctrine which he may adopt, can wholly de- 
liver his mind from the alarming anticipation of future 
misery for a sinful life. This is a strong evidence of his 
immortality and responsibility to God. The Scriptures 
invariably inculcate the doctrine of the soul's separate ex- 
istence — of its being the most noble part of our nature, 



284 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED 

When God formed the body of Adam, there was neither 
animal motion, nor the higher operations of intelligence, 
until He " breathed into him the breath of life;" and then 
it is expressly announced, that " man became a living 
soul." The separate existence of the soul is a momen- 
tous consideration; and, therefore, the ancients in af- 
firming any thing, did it with that solemn saying, " As thy 
soul liveth." David, in apprizing Jonathan of the mur- 
derous intentions of Saul, his father, sanctions his decla- 
ration with these solemn words, " As the Lord liveth, and 
as thy soul liveth, there is but a step between me and 
death." When the king of Judah swore unto Jeremiah, 
that he would not deliver him into the hands of the prin- 
ces who sought his life, the oath is worded in this impres- 
sive manner—" As the Lord liveth, that made us this soul, 
I will not put thee to death, neither will I give thee into 
the hands of these men who seek thy life." When Darius 
came to the lion's den, into which Daniel had been cast, 
enquiring whether he was alive, that holy man replied, 
" O king, live forever!" This must have been an imper- 
tinent desire, if men cease to have any consciousness af- 
ter death, until the resurrection. The import of Daniel's 
saying, is this, undoubtedly ; " O king, let thine happiness 
never cease ;" but that must have been a fruitless wish, 
unless his soul was immortal. 

The distinction between the soul and the body — the 
immortality and superior dignity of the spirit to the taber- 
nacle of clay, are very clearly mentioned by our Lord, in 
Matth. 10.28. In that passage, He saith, " Fear not 
them who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul ; 
but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and 
body in hell." There is no need of saying any thing on 
the impertinence of this saying, on the scheme of mate- 
rialism. Alas ! for those who advocate it ; they are al- 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISM. 285 

ways under the necessity of contending with the Oracles 
of God. But the principle under consideration, is further 
confirmed by the Great Teacher of men, in these solemn 
questions, namely : " What is a man profited, if he shall 
gain the whole world, and lose his own soul ? Or what 
shall a man give in exchange for his soul ?" Matth. 16. 26. 
Possessing an immortal spirit, is the glory of man ; it is 
that which gives him pre-eminence over all the other crea- 
tures on this globe. On this calculation, he may claim a 
kindred with the skies, as well as with the earth on which 
he treads ; he may be considered as an incarnate angel. 
This glorious truth may truly excite man to respect him- 
self, by acting at all times in conformity to the dignity of 
his nature. This magnanimity is perfectly compatible 
with exercising that humility required in the word of God. 

2. If it has been proved that man has an immaterial and 
immortal soul, we may conclude that it is a doctrine whose 
practical tendency must be excellent. The whole divine 
system is " according to godliness ;" but every capital error 
in theology, has a demoralizing tendency. But some, 
whose sentiments are heretical to a high degree, may be 
so much under the influence of other motives, as to pass 
through life with great external regularity ; while some, 
who advocate sound doctrine, may " hold the truth in un- 
righteousness." These peculiar cases do not settle the 
practical effects of any scheme of theology. The question 
to be settled, is, What effect a system has on those who 
embrace it, in a general view ? ' The doctrine of mere 
materiality, must have a destructive effect on the great - 
mass of mankind, if it were universally believed. On that 
plan, men would have nothing to hope for, nor to fear, be- 
tween death and the resurrection. All must lie in the 
grave, in an equally unconscious peace ! 

But when all the sacred passages are so construed as to 



286 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED 

mean nothing which relate to the immortality of the soul 
— happiness and misery in a separate state— to entertain 
some doubt of those which speak of a resurrection, will be 
both easy and natural. The adoption of one error paves 
the way for further advances ; and the end of the race is 
generally complete infidelity. The doctrine in question 
must give man such a low idea of his own nature and ori- 
gin — such faint conceptions of a future responsibility, as 
greatly to check his ambition in the cultivation of his mind, 
and the correction of his manners. 

We acknowledge, that some may be greatly refined in 
their intellectual powers, and very circumspect in their 
lives, with a full belief in the entire materiality of man ; 
but the scheme itself is by no means calculated to produce 
such an effect. Its advocates universally discard the doc- 
trine of eternal punishment ; and, in general, they do not 
admit of any misery after death. Of course, all that is to 
be feared beyond the present life, for sin, is annihilation. 
This cannot be a very appalling consideration to those 
who are wholly opposed to holiness and heaven. As " the 
carnal mind is enmity against God," to dwell forever in 
his presence, and to partake in the employment of holy 
beings, could not be a very pleasant anticipation. When 
sinners wish for heaven, it is because they think it is a 
place of happiness. They do not seem to consider their 
want of relish for that felicity, and, in fact, great aversion 
to it. They are greatly deceived in respect to themselves ; 
for if they were in heaven, with an unrenewed heart, they 
would wish for an immediate dismission. As they cannot 
understanding^ desire heaven — as they cannot always 
continue here — as hell is undesirable in a high degree — 
annihilation must be a consolation instead of a terror. It 
has been uniformly observed, that the doctrine of mate- 
rialism has, in general, cut off all anxiety about religion. 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISM. 287 

and induced its votaries to pursue, without fear, the course 
of this world. Their own writers have always been com- 
pelled to acknowledge the great indifference of that deno- 
mination to practical religion. This has been clearly 
shown in the Sermons on Gal. 4. 17 ; and those who wish 
for further information on the subject, are referred to Dr. 
Fuller's letters on " the Galvinistic and Socinian systems 
compared." That system which is commonly called Or- 
thodoxy, has always had the most powerful effect on the 
hearts and lives of men. In that, the immortality of the 
soul is admitted, and its entrance into happiness or misery 
immediately after death. It was with these things in view, 
that " Felix trembled ;" and they have a similar effect on 
many sinners now. In every congregation where the 
Trinitarian system is faithfully preached, some good effects 
of it clearly appear. " It is the power of God unto sal- 
vation," to thousands of mankind ; while the opposite 
scheme is obviously leaving its adherents " in the region 
and shadow of death," and has actually done so through 
all time. These conclusions are drawn from the divine 
testimony, and the experience of ages. I appeal to your 
conscience and observation, my hearers, for the truth of 
these remarks. In hearing of the soul's immortality, and 
the responsibility of men to God, you find it very difficult 
to sit as unconcerned spectators. You have found it, un- 
doubtedly, at many times, to be a powerful check on your 
depraved inclination — preventing you from unlawful in- 
dulgences. So far the effect has been excellent. The 
preaching of this system has been the means of bringing 
some of you to the knowledge of God ; and we hope that 
it will, instrumentally, effect the salvation of many more 
in this congregation. " The word of God is quick and 
powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword," when it 
is accompanied by the gracious operations of the Spirit. 



288 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED 

We may appear with confidence, therefore, in the defence 
of this system ; glorying in its practical tendency — in its 
eternal consequences ; for it leads to heaven — to the pre- 
sence of God. 

3. If we possess an immortal soul, capable of existing 
in and separate from the body, then we may conclude, 
that opposition to the doctrine, is taking a criminal and 
dangerous stand. It is criminal, because there is no pos- 
sibility of maintaining the ground without a departure from 
the letter and spirit of the Scriptures. The point in ques- 
tion, is as clearly settled there as the being of a God. It 
is not easy to see how it could have been stated with any 
greater clearnesss, than it is, in the Book of inspiration. 
In renouncing the belief of it, we must consider our own 
philosophy as being absolutely correct, and the only proper 
standard of decision in matters of this nature. But if phi- 
losophy must decide the momentous question, its voice is 
more against the resurrection of the body, than the immor- 
tality of the soul. Dr» Priestley has not, indeed, decided 
against that, but others have, whose acquisitions and pre : 
tensions have not been inferior to his. When the learned 
Greeks heard St. Paul preach on the resurrection of the 
dead, in the city of Athens, they treated the doctrine with 
the highest contempt. The language of human reason on 
this case, in all ages, has been, " How are the dead raised 
up ? and with what bodies do they come ?" These ques- 
tions can no more be answered on the ground of reason, 
than the immateriality and immortality of the soul. In 
fact, philosophy has much to say on these points, but noth- 
ing in behalf of the resurrection. The difference is pre- 
cisely this ; reason and Scripture combine, in teaching that 
the soul is distinct from the body — incorporeal in its es- 
sence, and eternal in its duration ; but the resurrection of 
the body, rests entirely on the testimony of the Bible. To 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISM. 289 

believe the latter and reject the former, is, therefore, not 
judging with, but against evidence. 

In reasoning in favor of the materiality and consequent 
mortality of the soul, we must oppose a multitude of pre- 
eminent philosophers, as well as writers inspired by the 
Holy Ghost. On such accounts, we are warranted to de- 
cide against the material system. It requires the " magna- 
nimity" of a Priestley, to think for a moment, of appearing 
in its defence. When he ventured to call what Moses 
says about the creation, " a lame account," the Anti-Trin- 
itarian reviewers pronounced him a magnanimous writer. 
It is very " magnanimous," indeed, to take a stand against 
the Heavens ! But we are not ashamed to say, that we 
dare not take such an elevated position. On the supposi- 
tion that the material scheme is false, the crime of ap- 
pearing in its defence is obvious. It is taking from the 
word of God. The crime of doing this is so great, that 
the LORD saith, that He shall take away the part of such 
an one from " the Book of life, and out of the holy city, 
and from the things which are written in this Book.* 
Rev. 22.19. 

An avowal of the principle in question, is no less than 
doubting the knowledge and veracity of the Holy One of 
Israel — the God of the whole earth ! If it is impossible 
that soul and body should be so united as to form one 
complex person ; or that the spirit should exist independ- 
ently of the body ; then we must think that God does 
not know these things ; or, that he has not adhered 
to the truth; for they are certainly contained in His 
word. To say, that the passages which mention these 
things, are either insertions or mistranslations , is a misera- 
ble retreat ; for after criticising the Scriptures in the clo- 
sest manner, that it can be fairly done, there will be abun- 
dant evidence left to support the soul's immortality. 
Oo 



290 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED 

Bat when all these arts fail, Dr. Priestley and his disci- 
ples have another shift ; namely, the denial of the plenary 
inspiration of the Scriptures. This completes the business. 
But in this affair, they have the unhappiness of contradic- 
ting the sacred writers, who have solemnly declared, that 
44 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God." If they 
have told the truth, the doctrine of materialism cannot be 
supported ; but if in that, they have stated a falsehood, 
thev are not to be trusted in any part of their testimony. 
Anti-Trinitarianism, in all its bearings, leads directly into 
the gloomy region of Infidelity. We need say no more, 
therefore, to prove the crime of appearing as its advo- 
cates. 

It will be readily admitted, I presume, that danger in- 
separably attends crime — Infinite Wisdom has established 
this connection. The sinful mind, on this account, is al- 
ways full of fear and trouble. No self-flattering theories, 
that wicked men can invent, will wholly relieve their 
minds. The threatenings of Heaven, enforced by the con- 
science, are like peals of thunder ; and the most obdurate 
of men, sometimes are forced to hear. To deny the sep- 
arate existence of the soul, is a dangerous doctrine, both 
for the preachers and hearers ; for Christ saith, " If the 
blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." Matth. 
15. 14. People who embrace a delusive system, must re- 
alize its painful consequences ; and to be employed in 
teaching it to others, greatly enhances their guilt, and 
adds to their misery. It is no small crime to ruin the 
souls of men. Being the property of God, He will, no 
doubt, call their destroyers to a solemn account. He ap- 
prised the Prophet Ezekiel of his duty in this respect, say- 
ing, " Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the 
house of Israel : therefore hear the word at my mouth, 
and give them warning from me. When I say unto the 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISE. 291 

wicked, Thou shalt surely die ; and thou givest him not 
warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wick- 
ed way, to save his life ; the same wicked man shall die 
in his iniquity ; but his blood will I require at thine hand" 
Ezek. 3. 17, 18. To be occupied in deluding immortal 
souls, is surely a much greater crime than merely neglect- 
ing to warn them to flee from " the wrath to come." But 
if all the preachers of error are involved in such guilt, in 
what an awful situation are they placed, who have taken 
the lead in capital and extensive heresies ? Arius, Mahom- 
et, Voltaire, and many others, whose names might be men- 
tioned, have, doubtless, been instrumental in the eternal 
ruin of many millions of mankind ! The inventor of the 
deleterious plan of materialism, must bear no inconsid- 
erable degree of comparison, in guilt and punish- 
ment, with those conspicuous file-leaders in iniquity. Ma- 
terialism is a dreadful scheme, when it is correctly viewed 
in its various bearings. It degrades man below the rank 
which he holds in the creation — cuts off his inducements 
to holiness — encourages him to commit sin — and pre- 
vents the very possibility of his salvation. It makes the 
proper Deity of Christ, an impossibility, and, of course, the 
idea of his Atonement, a mere farce. According to the 
plan in question, He, who is emphatically called, " The 
Son of God" can be nothing more than a curious organiza- 
tion of mere matter. If, as Dr. Priestley says, " there is 
no common property between matter and spirit, by which 
they can subsist in union," it will, of course, follow, that 
Christ's body could have no such connection with God, as 
to form one Person. The principle, in fact, excludes the 
possibility of His having even an immaterial and immortal 
soul. But, is it a thing credible, that One of such pre- 
eminent dignity as the Holy Scriptures represent the Lord 
Jesus Christ, should be, at last, no more than a composi- 



292 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL StIFPORTED 

tion of matter, and his astonishing intellect, the result of 
its peculiar modification ? They, who can lend themselves 
to believe such learned and philosophic nonsense, are, 
surely, prepared to " swallow a camel ! !" It is not improb- 
able, that Dr. Priestley adopted the theory of material- 
ism, to overthrow the Divinity and Atonement of Christ. 
In vain, however, "do the heathen rage, and the people 
imagine a vain thing." Great philosophers, with " the 
the rulers of the earth, may take counsel together, against 
the Lord, and against His anointed— He that sitteth in the 
heavens shall laugh : the Lord shall have them in deris- 
ion—He shall speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them 
in His sore displeasure." Psl. 2. 1 — 5. As to this mat- 
ter, " if we are wise, we shall be wise for ourselves but 
if we will " sit in the seat of the scornful," we must ex> 
pect to be " like the chaff which the wind driveth away." 
Psl. 1. 1,4. " God is not mocked." No ; He is infinitely 
jealous of His truth, and of His glory. 

4. If we possess immortal souls, it will necessarily fol- 
low, that we should examine the subject with great care, 
that our minds may be settled in regard to its truth. It is 
wicked to permit ourselves to think, that God has left a 
matter of such vast importance without sufficient evi- 
dence — evidence within the reach of the weakest mind. 
To be settled in this case, nothing farther is necessary, 
than diligence and common honesty; for the ground on 
which it rests, is the testimony of God, and that is so clear, 
that he that runs may read and understand. " The way- 
faring man, though a fool," in respect to abstruse subjects, 
" need not err" in this case. In this enquiry, the Lord 
will guide the meek in judging of the nature and proper- 
ties of the soul. It is not by human wisdom that a know- 
ledge of the mysteries of the invisible world is acquired. 
Many people, of eminent abilities and learning, are who!- 



IN OPPOSITION TO MATERIALISM. 293 

ly unacquainted with the plainest doctrines of the Scrip- 
tures. Their ignorance of theology, arises from the blind- 
ness of their hearts. It is a great unhappiness to be un- 
settled in respect to the soul's immortality — it is wicked — ■ 
a manifestation that they do not ask counsel of God. 
When people are placed under the influence of corrupt- 
ing principles, their attention to the Scriptures should be 
more close and constant, and be accompanied with unceas- 
ing prayer. 

Young people are, in a special manner, in imminent; 
danger under the sound of a deluding ministry. Bad im- 
pressions are easily made on juvenile and inexperienced 
minds. An oblique remark, a sarcastic sneer, a contemp- 
tible pamphlet, may lay the foundation of their everlasting 
ruin. Great events frequently grow out of apparently 
small causes. Parents should, therefore, be peculiarly 
anxious about their children, and careful in having their 
understanding properly cultivated on religious subjects. 
If they neglect the matter, Satan and his emissaries will 
not be slack in taking the advantage of it. The hearts of 
children are, by nature, prepared to fall before their se- 
ductive arts ! Sinful ways, and the doctrines which sup- 
port them, are always pleasing, when the heart is not re- 
conciled to God. We live in a dangerous world; and 
" the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately 
wicked." Those people are highly favored, who have 
been delivered from the bondage of moral corruption, and 
brought into the glorious liberty of the children of God ; 
for their minds are now settled on all the grand truths of 
the gospel. This produces peace, joy, and hope. 

5. If we possess an immortal soul, capable of existing 
separately from the body, it will follow, that its best in- 
terest claims our daily and strict attention. In general, 
much labor is bestowed to secure our welfare in the world ; 



294 THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL SUPPORTED, &C. 

but the soul is greatly neglected by the majority of man- 
kind. Such a course of action is superlatively foolish, 
As to this, Christ saith, " What is a man profited, if he 
shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul ? or, 
what shall a man give in exchange for his soul ?" It will 
amount to very little, whether we have been rich or poor, 
honorable or despised in this life, when we shall have en- 
tered on the scenes of eternity. The joys of heaven, or 
the miseries of hell, will very soon make us overlook all 
that we shall have passed through on the earth. My dear 
hearers, eternity is a solemn and impressive subject f In 
the view of it, we may say with Moses, concerning sin- 
ners, " O that they were wise ; that they understood this ; 
that they would consider their latter end !" Eternal sal- 
vation and damnation, are really overwhelming considera- 
tions \ They are calculated to rouse Christians to every 
possible exertion, and to awaken sinners from their moral 
sleep ; for it will be but a short time, when we shall all be 
either in heaven or in hell ! It is foolish and wicked be- 
yond conception, to ruin our own souls ! The highest 
eloquence is unequal to the illustration of this iniquity. 
Through divine mercy, we are now in a situation in which 
we may prepare to meet our God. O, let neither your 
Bibles, nor the Throne of Grace be neglected ! " Behold, 
now is the accepted time ! Behold, now is the day of sal™ 
vation !" Even if some here are great sinners, and grown 
old in iniquity, there is forgiveness with God, through 
Jesus Christ, that his name may be feared. Seek ye the 
Lord, therefore, while He may be found, and your light 
shall rise in obscurity ; and when your bodies are in the 
grave, your separate spirits shall shine like the sun in the 
kingdom of heaven. Amen. 



SERMON XXII. 



Malachi IV. 1 



Behold^ the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven ; and 
all the proud, yea, and all that do ivickedly, shall be 
stubble ; and the day that cometh shall burn them up, 
saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither 
root nor branch. 



This passage is highly alarming to people whose minds 
are not reconciled to God. It is an allusion to the day of 
judgment ; but that is not the event to which it has a pri- 
mary reference. The thing immediately intended, is the de- 
struction of the Jewish nation, for their long and unparalleled 
wickedness, and especially for their rejecting and crucify- 
ing the Lord of glory. It was about forty years after His 
ascension to heaven, that the event in view took place. It 
was effected by the Roman army, under Titus, who acted 
in the matter as the instrument of an avenging Providence. 

On a careful perusal of the book of Malachi, you will 
be convinced that that was the event the Prophet had in 
view, when he wrote the text on whose investigation we 
have entered. The desolation which was brought upon 
Judea and the city of Jerusalem, is memorable, and a stri- 
king emblem of the final judgment. It was such a cata- 
strophe in itself, and an emblem of such a momentous 
scene, as fully justifies these strong expressions : " Behold., 



296 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven ; and all the 
proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble ; and 
the day that cometh shall burn thetn up, saith the Lord of 
hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch." 
In respect to the destruction of the Jewish nation, Josephus 
writes, No other people ever suffered such calamities, 
and no other ever equalled them in wickedness. It was 
really a work of judgment, that makes the ear, in hearing 
of it, to tingle. The people fell beneath the Roman sword, 
like stubble fully dry, before the devouring flame. In 
consequence of that destruction, the Jews have been dis- 
persed over the whole earth, for almost eighteen hundred 
years. When the Roman army appeared, the Christians 
who were in Jerusalem, remembered the words of Christ, 
fled from the devoted place, and were saved from the de- 
vouring sword. The storm fell on the proud — on the 
doers of wickedness — on those who, by actions. or con- 
sent, had been guilty of the crucifixion of Christ. The 
event which has been mentioned, however, was but a faint 
shadow of the general judgment. On that day, the righ- 
teous shall escape, and the wicked shall be consumed. 
Surely, it shall burn as an oven— the wicked be as stubble 
—they shall be burned up — not having root or branch left. 
The phraseology of the text, however, is such, that some 
people have drawn from it the inconsistent inference, that 
finally impenitent sinners shall all be annihilated at the 
grand -consummation. Considering the inference to be 
inadmissible, we shall endeavor to show, 

I. The import of annihilation ; with some of the rea- 
sons on which the advocates of the doctrine think it is sup- 
ported ; and, 

II. Attempt to confute the scheme hy Scriptural argu- 
ments. 

We are to show. 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 297 

I. The import of annihilation ; with some reasons on 
which the advocates of ihe doctrine think it is supported. 

Annihilation, literally and properly signifies a return to 
that state of non-entity from which all things originally 
came. In that condition, there would be no more con- 
sciousness, no more joy, no more fear, no more sorrow, no 
more hope. If we have not an immaterial and immortal 
spirit, distinct from the body, but now connected with it, 
it will necessarily follow, that all mankind must be in a 
state of mental annihilation, between death and the resur- 
rection. Whether the body returns to non-entity, or not, 
is a thing of no importance in relation to the present ques- 
tion. When once the supposed operations of its organiza- 
tion are suspended by death, all knowledge of existence 
must cease, until the dust shall be reorganized by the 
power of the Creator. I have an impression, that those 
who believe in the annihilation of the wicked, think that 
they shall not be raised from the dead. But whether the 
matter of which their bodies are composed, shall, in their 
opinion, be annihilated or not, I have not been able to 
learn. This circumstance, however, is of no importance. 
If thought eternally ceases to be a modification of the 
matter of which they are now composed, they may be said, 
to all important purposes, to be annihilated. But sufficient 
has been said to explain the point in question ; for by an- 
nihilation, they undoubtedly mean, that the wicked shall 
be so far put out of being, as neither to suffer nor enjoy 
any more. W 7 e shall, therefore, proceed in showing some 
of the reasons on which the advocates of annihilation think 
it is supported. And, 

1. It is highly probable, that a conviction of the unfit- 
ness of impenitent sinners for the pure enjoyments of the 
heavenly world, is one reason for this conclusion. Such 
an inference is, by no means, incorrect ; for it is declared 
Pp 



298 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

in the Scriptures, that unsanctified people shall not inherit 
the kingdom of God. As to this point, the Anti-Trinita- 
rians differ from every class of the Universalians. One 
class of that general denomination, profess to believe, that 
all mankind are so interested in the Atonement of Christ, 
that they shall ascend immediately to heaven after death. 
The other, however, seem to think there will be a limited 
punishment inflicted on obstinate sinners ; and that, by 
enduring it, they will atone for their guilt, be purified 
from sin, and, in some period of eternity, be admitted to 
final happiness. But it is certainly more reasonable, and 
congenial with the declarations of Scripture, to believe, 
that those who die in opposition to God, shall rather be 
annihilated than received to heaven. We concur with 
them so far as to believe, that such people cannot be ad- 
mitted into heaven ; but that which seems to be a reason 
in their minds for annihilation, leads us to believe in their 
eternal punishment. 

2. Opposition to the doctrine of endless misery, is, no 
doubt, another reason which leads them to the belief of 
annihilation. While they admit that such sinners as have 
been mentioned, are unfit for heaven, they seem to be un- 
willing to allow that they shall be sent to a place of eter- 
nal pain. They contend, that the eternal continuance of 
sin and misery is inconsistent with the infinite benevolence 
of God. This argument is more plausible than solid ; it 
is calculated, however, to affect the feelings of men who 
are opposed to every thing that is contrary to a selfish in- 
clination. But the inference from the benevolence of Deity, 
that all sin and sorrow shall come to an everlasting end, is 
rather hastily drawn. If the argument has any force in it, 
it militates as powerfully against the existence of these 
things now, as it does against their continuance. The in- 
finite goodness of God cannot be consistently doubted : 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 299 

yet these evils have existed in all ages ; and we are au- 
thentically informed, that they are to be continued, in 
some degree, down to the end of time. If sin and sorrow 
are continued through the course of seven thousand years, 
under the government of God, we have no ground to con- 
clude that the eternal continuance of these evils may not 
be perfectly consistent with infinite wisdom and benevo- 
lence. The argument of the opposer is this, Wherefore 
should God make creatures, and determine that they should 
sin and suffer forever ? But to this we may reply, Why 
should God make creatures, permit them to sin, and cause 
them to suffer in this world, and at death annihilate them 
to all eternity ? An answer to the second difficulty, will 
be a complete reply to the first It is beyond our province, 
to say what is or is not wisest and best for God to do with 
his own creatures. To contend that sinners do not deserve 
eternal punishment, is assuming the seat of judgment, 
which none but JEHOVAH has either the right or the 
ability to fill. If criminals were permitted to decide on 
the degree of punishment which they deserve, no doubt, it 
would be light, and of short duration. But as all sin is 
against God, He is the only proper judge of its demerit, 
and of the degree and duration of the misery which his 
own glory, or the general good, require to be inflicted on 
the guilty. The feelings of many people, no doubt, revolt 
at the thought of future and eternal misery ; but they have 
Hot a proper sense of the Divine Honor, the evil of sin, and 
its tendency, unrestrained, to overturn the happiness of the 
universe. It is a mournful fact, that many, in judging in 
this case, are more influenced by their own feelings, than 
by reason and evidence. This lays a foundation for a 
multitude of wild and unsupported theories. Yes; to 
ward off the painful anticipation of the eternal wrath of 
God, men have recourse to the doctrine of universal sal- 



S(K) 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 



vation ; to the plan of restoration, after a limited future 
punishment ; and also to the belief of an everlasting anni- 
hilation. In these various ways, guilty men are endea- 
voring to obtain a present and momentary peace. But 
God solemnly declares, that " though hand join in hand, 
the wicked shall not be unpunished. 5 ' Proverbs 11. 21. 
" Justice and judgment are the habitation of His throne ; 
mercy and ttuth shall go before His face." Ps. 89, 14. 
u He is in one mind ; and who can turn Him ?" Job 23. 13. 
Every obstinate sinner hates to have justice take place in 
his own case. But we should remember, that our wicked 
feelings can make no alteration in divine truth. What 
that is, it will eternally remain to be, without any regard 
to our unreconciled wishes. To contend with God, be- 
cause his doctrines are unpleasant to us, is the very height 
of foolishness. If we are blind to the glory of God in the 
displays of His justice, He is not. In that case, He pro- 
claims, " As I live, all the earth shall be filled with my 
glory." Every one of the sinner's subterfuges must ulti- 
mately fail him; and no one of them is more delusive 
than that of annihilation. But the things that have been 
mentioned, are, undoubtedly, reasons on which the delu- 
sive scheme is founded ; but they are as volatile as air — 
unsolid as the slippery sand. But, 

3. Some equivocal passages of Scripture are pressed into 
the support of this dangerous doctrine. The very text 
which we are now investigating, is considered as one of 
their strong holds. It must be acknowledged, that its phra- 
seology is strong ; but it is certainly capable of more than 
one construction. It is said in this passage, that God will 
burn up the wicked ; and that He will leave them neither root 
nor branch. Annihilation, is one sense whidh may be put 
upon the text which we are now considering. But. it is 
highly figurative ; and therefore . it should be construed with 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 301 

great care and modesty ; comparing it with passages which 
are more plain, and relate to the same subject. It may on- 
ly m&m, that all the hopes of sinners shall be disappointed, 
and every vestige of their happiness destroyed, as com- 
pletely as if they were burned up. The words certainly 
convey the idea of the entire ruin of the wicked — but that 
may be perfectly consistent with the doctrine of theii; end 
less punishment. But if there were no other passages 
more clear, the annihilation of sinners might be argued 
with some degree of plausibility, but not with absolute 
certainty. There are some other texts, however, on which 
they appear to rely, that may now be mentioned. One is, 
1 Thess. 1. 7—10. It reads thus— "When the Lord Je- 
sus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels^ 
in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not 
God, and who obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus 
Christ ; who shall be punished with everlasting destruction 
from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of His 
power ; when .He shall come to be glorified in His saints, 
and to be admired in all them that believe." This passage, 
is, like the text that has been chosen for our theme, equiv- 
ocal — -capable of a double construction. In accordance 
with this, are the following passages, " The ungodly are 
like the chaff, which the wind driveth away — the ungodly 
shall not stand in the judgment— the way of the ungodly 
shall perish." Ps. 1.4—6. Another sacred writer says, 
" I went into the sanctuary of God ; then understood I 
their end. — Thou didst set them in slippery places ; thou 
castedst them down ipto destruction.— They are brought 
into desolation, as in a moment. — They are utterly con- 
sumed with terror. As a dream when one awaketh ; so, 
O Lord, when thou awakest, thou shalt despise their 
image." Ps. 73. 17 — 20. "The transgressors shall be 
destroyed together f the end of the wicked sliall be cut 



302 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

off." Ps. 37. So. Many such passages might be collected ; 
but to multiply them is unnecessary. The general argu- 
ments for the doctrine of annihilation, have now been ex- 
hibited ; at least, as far as I have a knowledge of them. 
The remarks which have been made, apply to all these 
passages, in respect to their import. To resort to such 
parts of the Scriptures, in support of the theory of annihi- 
lation, is a manifestation that the cause is in distress. 
In conformity to my promise, I shall proceed, 
II. To confute the scheme by Scriptural arguments. 
It is, certainly, the general belief of the Christian world, 
that the existence of sinners is to be eternal, as well as 
the existence of the saints. Their faith, in this respect, 
is founded on the following reasons : 

1. There is no express declaration in the Bible, that sin- 
ners are to be annihilated. The passages on which reli- 
ance is placed, by the advocates of that plan, are all am- 
biguous — capable of another explication. A doctrine of 
such magnitude, certainly, requires express testimony in 
its favor. Without this, it is highly presumptuous, either to 
believe, or advocate it. It is deluding ourselves, and ru- 
ining the souls of others. If the doctrine were believed, 
it would be a powerful inducement to the wicked to pur- 
sue their sinful courses, without any thought of repenting, 
or reforming their lives. It is, therefore, a dangerous and 
vain expectation. 

2. It is very unreasonable to suppose, that an intelli- 
gent being should cease to exist. The Psalmist says of 
man, " Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, 
and hast crowned him with glory and honor. Thou 
madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands ; 
thou hast put all things under his feet." Ps. 8. 5, 6. God, 
therefore, must have a higher end to answer by the exis- 
tence of man, than merely to display his power in his 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 303 

creation and subsequent annihilation. The Bible assures 
us, that He " hath made all things for himself." Prov. 
16. 4. But if annihilation would be a display of the 
power and justice of God, in relation to sinners, surely, 
their eternal punishment will be a much brighter illustra- 
tion of these infinite perfections. In this case, the uni- 
verse will eternally behold the unlimited evil of sin — the 
infinite opposition of God to it; and see the glory of His 
vindictive justice displayed on the guilty. Sinners are 
said to be " vessels of wrath ;" but this expression would 
have very little meaning, if they were to be annihilated. 
The power and justice of God, will be far more conspic- 
uous in supporting their existence in a state of punish- 
ment, than they would be in reducing them to their prim- 
itive non-entity. Annihilation is but a faint manifestation 
of the evil of sinning against God, when compared with 
endless sufferings. There is no need of taking away the 
being of sinners ; for if no good end could be answered 
by their eternal misery, God could easily renew their 
minds, pardon their transgressions, and fit them for end- 
less glory* Some of the greatest sinners have been sa- 
ved by the power and grace of God. Such were Ma- 
nasseh, the thief on the cross, and others who could be 
mentioned. Thus we see that one of these great sinners 
was regenerated and pardoned in his last moments, and 
in his dying agonies. Men were not created to be an- 
nihilated, but to display the justice and mercy of God, 
If it were inconsistent with unlimited goodness to punish 
sinners eternally, God would, undoubtedly, display the 
glory of His mercy in their everlasting salvation. Jus- 
tice, however, is a divine perfection as well as mercy ; 
and it is as proper that the one should shine forever as the 
other. If all the enemies of JEHOVAH should be an- 
nihilated at the judgment day, it would not set the evil of 



304 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

sin in such a striking light, in the view of the intelligent 
universe, as in beholding them constantly and forever suf- 
fering the due reward of their iniquity. The conception 
is too trifling to be cherished for a moment, that God 
should form intelligent agents to be the mere creatures of 
a day — to flutter like an atom in the beams of the sun ? 
and then eternally disappear ! 

3. The painful anticipations which sinners have in re- 
lation to futurity, are in direct opposition to the belief of 
their annihilation. We know that their fears, on this ac- 
count, are very great and distressing. It is inconsistent to 
suppose that God, whose benevolence is unlimited, would 
suffer His rational creatures to be constantly tortured with 
needless fears. Surely, there is not a hint in all the 
Scriptures, that the fears of sinners are disproportioned to 
their danger ; unless it be in having them in too small a 
degree. But, after all that is said on the pleasing theories 
of universal salvation ; the future restoration of all men to 
holiness and happiness ; and on the eternal annihilation of 
the wicked ; such teachers find it difficult wholly to re- 
move their own fears, or to remove the painful apprehen- 
sions of their hearers. " The Holy Scriptures cannot be 
broken," which expressly declare, that the wicked " have 
a certain fearful looking-for of judgment, and fiery indig- 
nation, which shall devour the adversaries." Heb. 10. 27. 
Men may reason fallaciously in their own favor ; but con- 
science, at certain times, will make them feel. In oppo- 
sing the doctrine of eternal punishment, such preachers 
address the passions and prejudices of their hearers ; but 
those men who vindicate it, appeal to the conscience, the 
understanding, and the heart. They are far more vul- 
nerable to truth, than the passions and prejudices of men. 
It is said of the inspired preachers, that they commended 
themselves "to every mail's conscience in the sight of 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 305 

God." Divine truth is armed with a power, to which 
falsehood can lay no claim. It is " sharper than any two- 
edged sword" — piercing the hardest heart. Under St. 
Peter's preaching on the day of Pentecost, his hearers 
" were pricked in their hearts, and said, Men and brethren, 
what shall we do ?" Acts 2. 37. No such effects were 
ever witnessed, under the doctrine of eternal annihilation. 
It is, therefore, a mere anodyne — an intoxicating cup — a 
draught of poison ; it produces death ! 

4. It is not consistent with the demerit of sin, that its 
subjects should ever be annihilated. It is committed 
against God ; and as He is a Being of boundless majest} r 
and moral excellency, it must be, in its very nature, an 
infinite evil. There must, therefore, be some proportion 
between the crime and the punishment. Surely, the dif- 
ference between annihilation and endless misery, may be 
called infinite. It is the very nature of sin to pour con- 
tempt on the character of God ; and, therefore, the magni- 
tude of its evil must exceed the power of description ! If 
our concern for the Divine Honor were as strong as our 
prejudices against pain, our vociferation against eternal 
misery would be completely silenced. The sinner's de- 
sert of punishment is just as great as God is glorious, and 
no more. Just as much, therefore, as we lessen the idea 
of future punishment, we impair the value of His glory, 
who created and rules the universe ! He saith, " It is an 
evil and bitter thing to sin against Him," and not to 
have His fear in our hearts. If it is a proper thing that 
God should display his own worth in punishing sinners, it 
is right that He should inflict that degree of it, which is, 
in an important sense,, infinite. No finite being can suffer 
a punishment which can, in any sense, be called infinite, 
but by suffering through an unlimited duration. Annihi- 
lation would be an instantaneous operation : and in \m- 
Q Q 



306 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

dergoing it, there would be no consciousness of any mi- 
sery. It would be placing us, in one moment, in that 
non-entity from which we came. It could hardly be said, 
in such a case, that sinners were punished ; it would be 
merely losing the reward of righteousness, In this view 
of the case, the threatenings contained in the Holy Scrip- 
tures, evaporate in the air. But we have no right to en- 
tertain such an opinion of that, which God saith, " My 
soul hateth ;" and of which, an Apostle says, " It is ex- 
ceedingly sinful." Eternity, however, will bear witness 
to the evil and ruinous nature of sin. But, 

5. The annihilation of sinners is contrary to the posi- 
tive declarations of JEHOVAH, in His inspired word. 
Though the reasons which have been offered against an- 
nihilation, have great weight, we do not rely on them as 
being absolutely conclusive. They make the eternal ex- 
istence and misery of sinners, however, highly probable. 
As collateral testimony; they are of sufficient weight to be 
exhibited. But positive divine assertions need very little 
corroboration ; and to such incontestible evidence we will 
now resort. Instead of annihilating sinners, Christ in- 
forms lis, that He will say to them at the judgment seat. 
" Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, pre- 
pared for the devil and his angels." Matth. 25. 41, It is 
added, in the 46th verse, " And these shall go away into 
everlasting punishment." If there were nothing more in 
the Scriptures, on this subject, these two passages are suf- 
ficient to* settle it forever. There has been much said to 
evade the true meaning of the word EVERLASTING : 
but notwithstanding all their cavils, every scholar must 
say that it is a powerful — an unlimited expression. The 
learned and the unlearned irresistibly feel its fo'rce. 

But we must proceed to further Scriptural testimony on 
this momentous subject. It is said by the Apostle Judo,. 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 307 

that Sodom and Gomorrah, for their heinous sins against 
God, " are set forth for an example, suffering the ven- 
geance of eternal fire." That wicked generation, there- 
fore, had not been annihilated ; but were actually enduring 
misery in the days of this Apostle ; and had then endured 
it, for upwards of two thousand years. He does not say 
that they had suffered, in the past tense ; but that they 
were then suffering, in the present tense. This passage 
stands in direct oppssition, both to the doctrine of mate- 
rialism and annihilation. The man who appeared at the 
marriage feast without a wedding garment, " the King 
said to his servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take 
him away, and cast him into outer darkness ; there shall 
be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Matth. 22. 13. This 
phraseology, in relation to the treatment of sinners after 
death, is used by Christ four times in the Gospel of Mat- 
thew, and once in the Gospel of Luke. " Weeping and 
gnashing of teeth," are strong expressions of great pain ; 
and is, therefore, inconsistent with the cessation of exist- 
ence. It is said by Jesus Christ, " If thy hand offend thee, 
cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, 
than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that 
never shall be quenched ; where their worm dieth not, 
and the fire is not quenched." Mark 9. 43, 44. This 
unequivocal and awful language, is three times repeated 
in the above-mentioned chapter. The sinner is " the 
worm," which is said never to die ; and the fire in which 
he is placed, we see is never to be extinguished. This 
sacred statement is utterly inconsistent with the doctrine 
of annihilation. 

The case of the rich glutton, also shows that future 
misery commences immediately after death ; and the pas- 
sages that have been just quoted, prove that it is to be 
eternal Concerning the unhappy rich man, our Lord 



308 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED, 

saith, that " lie died, and was buried ; and in hell he lifted 
up his eyes, being in torments." Luke 16. 22—24. In 
relation to the point in view, St. John says, " If any man 
worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in 
his forehead or in his hand, the same shall drink of the 
wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without 
mixture into the cup of his indignation ; and he shall be 
tormented with fire and brimstone, in the presence of the 
holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb ; and the 
smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever ; 
and they have no rest day nor night." Rev. 14. The 
same writer says, " The devil, who deceived them, was 
cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast 
and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and 
night, for ever and ever." Rev. 20. 

These divine passages clearly show, that neither wicked 
men nor devils are to be annihilated ; but they shall have 
to exist in misery to eternity. This kind of testimony 
might be greatly enlarged ; but it is altogether unneces- 
sary ; for what has been said, is ample and conclusive. 
There is no such thing as rising up against the evidence 
which has been advanced, but by an absolute refusal to 
submit to the decision of the Scriptures. But, I hope, my 
hearers, that you are not yet prepared to take such a fatal 
stand. If I know my heart, the object in these discourses 
has been, to preserve you from placing yourselves in" such 
an awful situation. 

The improvement of this subject must be reserved for 
the next occasion. Take heed, therefore, how ye hear ; 
and prepare to meet your God. Amen< 



SERMON XXIII. 



Malachi iv. 1. 



Behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven ; and 
all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be- 
stubble ; and the day that cometh shall bum them up, 
saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither 
root nor branch. 



In the foregoing sermon, the annihilation of the wicked, 
with some of the arguments by which its advocates en- 
deavor to support that theory, have been exhibited. But 
in opposition to it, such evidence has been adduced, as 
ought to be deemed sufficient. We may, therefore, con- 
sider the everlasting existence, and consequent misery of 
the finally impenitent, as a doctrine fully established. All 
that remains to be done, is the 

IMPROVEMENT. 

1. If sinners are not to be annihilated, but eternally 
punished, we must conclude that their case is highly 
alarming. It is impossible for them to flee from God, 
either in this, or in a future world. As He will not anni- 
hilate them, and no others can, they will have to be eter- 
nally miserable. If they could, no doubt they would give 
ten thousand worlds to escape from their existence. They 
will learn, by a painful experience, that " it is a fearful 



310 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

thing to fall into the hands of the living God." " He that 
made them will not have mercy, on them, and He that 
formed them will show them no favor." They are all 
now under the condemnation of the Almighty. The awful 
but just sentence will never be revoked, while they con- 
tinue to oppose the government and law of God. Alas ! 
*■ enmity against God," is, in truth, the character of man 
by nature ! The opposition is reciprocal, and constantly 
maintained ; and therefore, God saith of sinners, " My 
soul loathed them, and their souls abhorred me." ZecL 
11. 8. As sinners are fatally determined never to yield to 
God, and as there is no possibility of withstanding his 
power, their case is truly awful. The language of Heaven 
to them is, " Can thine heart endure, or can thine hands 
be strong, in the day that I shall deal with thee ? I the 
Lord have spoken it, and I will do it." Ezek. 22. 14. In 
fact, the impenitent will neither be able to endure their 
misery, nor to flee from it. There could be no such heart- 
rending expressions used with propriety, if sinners are all 
to be annihilated at death. No man could be aware of the 
moment of that event, nor feel the least distress under the 
operation. The slight anticipations which sinners may 
have now of such an end, must constitute all their suffer- 
ings. This can bear no comparison with having to appear 
at the bar of God ; to see an angry Judge of infinite 
power ; to hear Him say, " Depart from me, ye cursed ;" 
and then to sink into eternal flames ! Every unconverted 
soul is exposed every moment to all the evil that has been 
described. The Lord saith, " He that believe th not, is 
condemned already." John 3. 18. No condition can be 
more alarming than that of an unconverted sinner, until 
the sentence of Heaven shall have been actually executed. 
This led an Apostle to say, " Knowing therefore the terror 
of the Lord, we persuade men." 2 Cor. 5. 11. When 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 311 

these solemn truths are fastened on the mind, by divine op- 
eration, the sinner begins to be awakened. His cry then 
is, " What shall I do to be saved?" In the view of sin 
and divine wrath, every degree of his selfish peace is com- 
pletely destroyed. The apparent peace of a sinful world, 
is truly surprising. Alas ! they have no proper sense of their 
guilt and danger. They hate to open their ears to the sound 
of searching preaching, lest their guilty repose should be 
disturbed. But however great their ease may be, min- 
isters and Christians are alarmed about them ; and they cry 
to God that their perishing souls may be saved. The 
anxiety of the Christian world is increasing greatly, in 
respect to the case of sinners ; but it is very far from be- 
ing equal to what it ought to be. There is great need of 
more copious showers of divine grace, on the church, and 
on the world. " The glory of God must yet cover the 
earth, as the waters fill the sea." His people, therefore, 
are now called in a pressing manner, to unite their pray- 
ers and exertions. The command is, " Ye that make 
mention of the Lord keep not silence, and give Him no 
rest, till He establish, and till He make Jerusalem a praise 
in the earth." He is now causing many of His servants 
to say, " For Zion's sake will I not hold my peace, and 
for Jerusalem's sake I will not rest, until the righteousness 
thereof go forth as brightness, and the salvation thereof 
as a lamp that burneth." 

2. If the wicked are not to be annihilated, but eternal- 
ly punished, we may learn the vast importance of appri- 
zing them of their guilt and danger. The Holy Scrip- 
tures reflect sufficient light on this mournful case. The 
universality of sin, and the total depravity of every hu- 
man being, are truths clearly revealed and powerfully im- 
pressed there. At the judgment day, sinners will see that 
it was not for the want of light, on their own case, that 



312 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

they remained in darkness. It is a chosen darkness — not 
liking to retain God in their knowledge — saying to the 
Almighty, Depart from uf 3 for we desire not the know- 
ledge of thy ways. God warns men not to sin against 
Him, by His commandments and prohibitions, by His 
threatnings and judgments. He presses them to embrace 
Christ, and to flee from the wrath to come, by the most 
tender expostulations — the most affecting invitations — and 
by the glorious promises of eternal life. He has barred 
the road to endless destruction in such a manner, that it 
requires great determination and perseverence to reach 
that dreadful place, w T hich is " prepared for the devil and 
his angels !" " Why will ye die ?" is sounded in the ears 
of sinners from day to day. The glorious door of salva- 
tion, through divine grace, is opened wide to mankind. 
The Lord may truly say, " What more could I have done 
for my vineyard, that I have not done in it? W T hen I 
looked that it should bring forth grapes ; wherefore, brought 
it forth wild grapes?" In a word, every warning that 
sinners need, is contained in the Scriptures. In addition 
to these Holy Oracles, He hath appointed religious in- 
structors, to press men with every possible argument, " in 
season and out of season," to repent, believe, and turn to 
God. Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, and ordinary min- 
isters have been, and now are, employed in this important 
business. Their instruction, in all ages, has been, " Say 
ye to the wicked, It shall be ill with him." But to 
penitents, they have always been directed to say, in the 
name of the Lord, " Though your sins be as scarlet, they 
shall be white as snow 7 ; though they be red like crimson, 
they shall be as wool." Isa. 1. 18. To the obstinate, 
they have always been directed to proclaim, that the wrath 
of God is revealed from heaven, against all ungodliness 
and unrighteousnes of men" — to say, " Tribulation and 
anguish upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 313 

Jew first, and also of the Gentile." Rom. 1.18. chap. 2. 5. 
It is the united voice of the ministers of the word, " Now 
then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did 
beseech you by us; we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye 
reconciled to God." 2 Cor. 5. 20. The Scriptures con- 
tain suitable instructions for uninspired ministers, in rela- 
tion to all the duties which are incumbent on them. They 
are required to explain and enforce every doctrine, duty? 
promise and threatening, contained in their instructions ; 
and to inform men, how they may obtain happiness and 
avoid misery. In this case, their instructions are ample ; 
being no less than the whole word of God. They have 
no discretionary power in this matter — -no right to depart 
from their instructions in the least degree. They are nei- 
ther to add nor diminish, on the pain of God's eternal dis- 
pleasure; for He saith, " If any man shall add unto these 
things, God shall add unto him the plagues which are 
written in this book. And if any man take away from 
the words of the book — God shall take away his part out 
ef the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from 
the things which are written in this book." Rev. 22. 18,, 
19. They arc the best instructors, who adhere the most 
closely to the divine rule, in their life and doctrine. They 
have ample room to display all the talents they may possess., 
in study, argument and persuasion. There is no want of 
sufficient materials to convince men of sin — to apprize 
them of their danger, and to show them the way of life., 
if they themselves have an experimental acquaintance 
with God — with their own hearts, and with the Holy 
Scriptures. To leave any thing undone, which is in their 
power to do to convince sinners, is extremely wicked. 
The ministers of the glorious gospel, need great know- 
ledge — they should be very active; and feel at all times 

the constraining love of Christ, Thev are appointed tc 
Rr 



314 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

watch for souls, and they must give an account to God 
for all their ministrations. To have immortal souls per- 
ish through their neglect, is an affecting consideration. 
Their hearts should be filled with benevolence to men ; 
zeal for the glory of God, and the advancement of the Re- 
deemer's kingdom, should animate them to unwearied 
exertions. In instructing and warning men, no oppor- 
tunity should be neglected. The harvest truly is great ;. 
but faithful laborers are few. It is a glorious thing to be 
employed, as humble instruments, in saving the souls of 
men. They will be crowns of joy to faithful ministers, 
in the day of Christ. Every thing should be done, so 
that, if sinners are lost, the fault may be their own. 

3. If the wicked are not to be annihilated, but eternally 
punished, we may see the great iniquity of deceiving them. 
False doctrines lead to death — eternal death ! It is, there- 
fore, highly criminal to tell sinners, that all they have to 
dread is annihilation. They would not very generally 
adopt such pernicious principles, unless they were incul- 
cated by learned, artful, studious, and active men. It is 
true of such teachers, that " they are wise to do evil ; but to 
do good, they have no knowledge." Alas ! " they know 
not what they do !" The depravity of their hearts makes 
them reason on divine subjects in a manner that is unwor- 
thy of the learning and abilities which they possess. In 
this fallen world, many whose natural powers and ac- 
quirements are eminent, appear to be profoundly ignorant 
in respect to the interesting science of divinity. In their 
case, that apostolical saying is true, " Having the under- 
standing darkened, being alienated from the life of God, 
through the ignorance that is in them, because of the 
blindness of their hearts." Eph. 4. 18. As they do not 
love to retain God in their knowledge, they rack their 
minds to invent schemes which are adapted to soothe their 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED, 315 

io\vn fears, and to relieve the feelings of other sinners. It 
is, however, a very wicked employment to be " crying 
peace when there is no peace." But when men will ven- 
ture to teach such smooth and delusive doctrines, there 
always will be some who " love to have it so ;" but as a 
prophet says, " What will be the end thereof ?" Such 
deceivers of mankind are in danger of something worse 
than annihilation, even eternal damnation. If, as Solomon 
says, " he that winneth souls is wise," we may be assured, 
that he who ruins them, is exceedingly foolish. If the 
men who turn many to righteousness, " shall shine as the 
brightness of the firmament, and as the stars for ever and 
ever ;" we may infer, that corrupting the principles, de- 
basing the morals of men, and fitting them for eternal de- 
struction, must sink the agents into the blackness of dark- 
ness forever. In hearing that sinners are to be annihilated, 
and not eternally punished, many may venture on the 
commission of crimes, which, under different views, they 
would never have perpetrated. The belief of annihilation 
must be dangerous to the peace of society, as well as to 
the salvation of the soul. If, as has been proved, the notion 
is false in theory, and pernicious in its effects, inculcating it 
must be a high-handed act of iniquity. Every benevolent 
heart, therefore, should reprobate the promulgating of it, 
as a thing dishonorable to God, injurious to community, 
and calculated to populate the region of endless despair ! 
But it is truly said by St. Paul, that " evil men and sedu- 
cers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being de- 
ceived." Dangerous errors, however, must be opposed in 
the spirit of the Gospel ; yet, with perspicuity, ardor and 
perseverance. Bitterness is not admissible, however wick- 
ed, erroneous, and inimical to us, its abettors may be. 
It is the voice of God, " The servant of the Lord must 
not $trive ; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, pa-* 



31 6 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

tient, in meekness instructing those who oppose. 5 ' In 
contending with heretics, it should be remembered, that 
we are, by nature, the enemies of God, even as others* 
If we have embraced the truth, it has been through Divine 
grace ; and, therefore, we have no right to glory over any 
of our fellow men. We are bound to pray for the most 
erroneous and sinful part of men. It is our duty, however* 
to convince them, if possible, of their guilt and danger \ 
for that is an act of real benevolence. 

4. If sinners are not to be annihilated, but eternally pu- 
nished, we may learn the importance of their being con- 
vinced of these things. No man is called upon to believe 
anything without sufficient evidence. In the investiga- 
tion of a subject of this nature, we may set this down as a 
fact, that there is no conclusive evidence of it, but in the 
Scriptures. No doubt, God can annihilate any thing that 
He has made ; but whether He will, or will not annihilate 
sinners, our reason is incompetent to determine. The 
Bible, therefore, is the only rule by which the matter can 
be decided. The advocates for annihilation, we have seen ? 
have recourse to Scripture for the support of their theory. 
Great care, therefore, should be taken in studying that 
Book, not to draw from it any improper conclusions. It 
must be allowed, that many different systems are profes- 
sedly built upon that foundation. This must convince us, 
that many are wresting the sacred pages from their true 
meaning ; for they cannot support opposite doctrines. To 
believe that those writings are obscure, would be a great 
reflection on their glorious Author. But if that is not the 
case, it must certainly follow, that many are not faithful 
to themselves, in the examination of that inspired Volume. 
By detaching a passage from its connection, and forcing a 
literal meaning on words that are highly figurative, and 
capable of different constructions, any thing may be easily 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 317 

proved. But when we see a doctrine supported by express 
and unequivocal Scripture testimony, it must not be set 
aside, because doubtful passages are urged against it. It 
is an excellent rule of interpretation, to settle the meaning 
of doubtful texts by such as are clear and express ; and 
not to explain away the meaning of positive assertions, by 
passages that are figurative, and capable of different solu- 
tions. By proceeding in such a preposterous way, many 
have deceived themselves and others. When passages are 
adduced to prove a theory, that is in itself congenial with 
the reigning depravity of the heart, their application may 
be consistently doubted. It is not to be expected, that 
divine truth will ever be flattering to human pride, nor 
pleasing to sinners. We have seen, that the eternal pu- 
nishment of the finally impenitent, is supported by express 
declarations of Scripture ; and, therefore, the passages 
which are pressed into the service of an opposite hypo- 
thesis, are, undoubtedly, misconstrued, and improperly 
applied. If we were honest, we might very easily settle 
the point in question. It is the deceitfulness of the heart, 
that presents the subject in a doubtful light, or determines 
the mind in favor of the doctrine of annihilation. It is 
wicked and dangerous to be halting between these opi- 
nions. Placing ourselves before the throne of God, with 
the Bible open in our view, and our hand upon our heart ? 
let this great question be settled ; for, in such a solemn 
attitude, we will, undoubtedly, come to a proper conclu- 
sion. Conscience testifies in favor of such a method of 
procedure ; but, alas ! the heart of the sinner is against it • 
He hates to be disquieted. It is much better, however, 
to tremble now, than to tremble at the sound of the last 
trumpet. Instead of annihilation, Jesus Christ saith, " The 
hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves 
shall hear His voice, and shall come forth : they that have 



318 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

done good, unto the resurrection of life ; and they that 
have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."— 
John 5. 28,29. 

Thus an attempt has been made, in four discourses, to 
reflect some light on this momentous subject. It is a 
duty, my hearers, which I owe to you, and I have endea- 
vored to discharge it, I hope, with some degree of faith- 
fulness. Let it rest upon your minds, that you must 
shortly give an account unto God for your conclusions, in 
relation to this subject. According to the best of my abil- 
ity, I have tried to acquit my conscience in this matter. 
There is no indecision in my own mind, concerning the 
immateriality and immortality of the soul ; nor about the 
eternal punishment of those who die in opposition to God. 
The careful examination of the opposite theory, has serv- 
ed to establish my former principles, if possible, more 
firmly. We must consider all other supposed evidence 
but the Scriptures, as being irrelevant to this subject. The 
doctrines which have been vindicated in these discourses^ 
are firmly supported by that standard which ought to be 
sufficient evidence in our view. 

5. If the wicked are not to be annihilated, but eternal- 
ly punished, we may see how important it is, that they 
should become righteous immediately. As all men have 
sinned, it is a fact that they cannot become innocent ; yet, 
there is a way in which they may be justified; and that 
is through the atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ. On 
this, St. Paul says, " Being justified by faith, we have 
peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ." Rom. 
5. L He was "made sin — a sin offering — for us who 
knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of 
God in Him." 2 Cor. 5. 21. He is able, therefore, to 
save to the uttermost, even the greatest of sinners, who 
come to God by Him. Repentance and faith are the con- 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 319 

ditions on which salvatiun is suspended ; and these condi- 
tions may be easily performed by the willing mind. We 
are placed under such circumstances, that if we perish, 
our criminality will be great. It is no small consolation to 
know, that we may be as completely happy, and God as 
fully glorified, as if we had never sinned, through the 
atonement and intercession of Christ. Well might the an- 
gel say to the shepherds, " Behold, I bring you good ti- 
dings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto 
you is born this day, in the city of David, a Savior, who is 
Christ the Lord." Luke 2. 10, 11. It is far more easy 
to repent, believe and prepare for heaven, than it is to vin- 
dicate the gloomy doctrine of annihilation, with its de- 
pendant and kindred errors. As far as that is believed, it 
is an effectual bar against all holy repentance. Eternal 
salvation, my hearers, is effected through grace, in oppo- 
sition to every scheme of self-righteousness. There is no 
such thing as standing before God, on the ground of 
works, for the voice of his justice is, " Cursed is every 
one that continueth not in all things, written in the book 
of the law to do them." Gal. 3. 10. Again it is said ? 
he that " offendeth in one point is guilty of all." James 
2. 10. This cuts off every plea that can be made, on the 
ground of merit. " It is through faith we are saved; that 
it may be of grace ; that the promise may be sure to all the 
seed" — the chosen of the Lord. All that is required of 
us, therefore, is to accept of mercy through the great Re- 
deemer. To be righteous, in the gospel sense of the 
term, signifies one whose heart is renewed — whose sins 
are pardoned, and whose person and services are accepted 
in Christ, the Great Head of the Church. The greatest 
sinner on earth, may become a saint instantaneously. The 
difference between these characters is simply this ; the 
®ne hates an infinitely Holy God, and the other loves Him 






320 ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 

on account of that purity and glory. As there can be n# 
medium between hatred and love, the Christian character 
must be formed in one moment. The very first exercise 
of holy love involves every other Christian grace in its ve- 
?y nature. The transition, therefore, from a state of mor- 
al death and condemnation, to holiness and eternal happi- 
ness, must be more sudden than the lightning. 

Though holiness in man is the fruit of the Spirit's opera- 
tion, it consists in the voluntary exercises of his own heart ; 
and, on that account, he is as really a free agent as if it 
were self caused. This doctrine makes the creature en- 
tirely dependent ; but it does not annihilate his moral lib- 
erty, nor exonerate him from being responsible to his God. 
To plead for any greater liberty in the case of men, is con- 
tending for that which is peculiar to Jehovah ; namely, in- 
dependence, which is in fact incommunicable. It is ne 
dishonor to the glorious name of God, to say, that He can- 
not form a creature, who shall in any respect be independ- 
ent of Himself As man is a free and moral agent, he is 
a proper subject of commands and prohibitions — threaten- 
ings and promises ; and actually blamable for remaining 
one moment longer the enemy of God. In this view of 
the subject, it is the indispensible duty of every sinner to 
he a converted soul, before he draws another breath* 
The imperative requirement of Heaven is, " Make you a 
new heart, and a new spirit ;" and therefore, to live with- 
out this glorious change, is the summit of disobedience. 
If we have a right to continue without that, which God 
^commands us to possess ; it must follow, that no other di- 
vine precept is absolutely binding. An opposite doctrine 
sets all things afloat in the moral world. A strict depend? 
ence on JEHOVAH, for all our moral exercises, is, there- 
fore, consistent with moral freedom and obligation. As 
4here is no such thing to be expected as annihilation? it k 



ANNIHILATION CONFUTED. 821 

high time to lay aside our vain apologies, and submit to God 
on divine principles. It must be a very rebellious mind, that 
leads people to believe in the gloomy — the delusive — the hor- 
rid doctrine of annihilation. It grows out of a desire to es- 
cape from the justice of God : it consists in a total disre- 
gard of His glory. It is as necessary that the sinner's ex- 
istence should be continued, to display the vindictive justice 
of the Almighty, as it is, that the saints should live forever, 
to illustrate the riches of His mercy and grace. He will 
not lose any of His glory in the case of His creatures ; for 
" the wrath of men shall praise Him." In accents of glori- 
ous majesty, He proclaims to the universe, " My counsel 
shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure." Isa. 46. 10. 
As " the Lord reigneth ; let the earth rejoice ; let the mul- 
titude of the Isle§ be glad thereof." Ps. 97. 1. It is al- 
so said, " the Lord reigneth ; let the people tremble : He 
sitteth between the cherubim ; let the earth be moved." 
Ps. 99. 1. "Justice and judgment are the habitation of 
His throne ; righteousness and truth go before His face ; 
but there is forgiveness with Him, that His name maybe 
feared." The holy angels veil their faces before Him ; and 
in his glorious presence, devils tremble ! All on earth are 
commanded to fear His name, with a holy fear ; because 
with God, there is terrible Majesty ! He covereth Himself 
with light, as with a garment — light that infinitely outshines 
the sun in all its meridian splendor ! 

There is no such thing for sinners as annihilation ; nor 
any possibility of escaping from the eye of God ! They 
may forfeit eternal happiness, by a persevering rejection of 
Christ and His salvation ; but they can never cease to ex- 
ist. As you will never, my hearers, be annihilated, let no 
time be lost in preparing to meet your God in peace ; and 
let every voice in this assembly, sav, Amen. 

Ss " 



SERMON XXIT. 



Acts ii. 36, 



Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that 
God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified^ 
both Lord and Christ 



In the early part of last summer, I was requested by a 
gentleman, whose sentiments are opposed to the proper 
Deity of Christ, to preach from these words ; giving me 
at the same time a promise, that if I would let him know 
when the discourse would be delivered, he would honor 
me with his attendance. Various avocations have preven- 
ted me until now, from complying with his request. It is 
his opinion, no doubt, that the passage before us, is incon- 
sistent with Trinitarian sentiments, in respect to the person 
of Christ. Did I suppose, there was one text in the volume 
of inspiration, in opposition to Christ's supreme Divinity, 
I should no longer remain a Trinitarian. But as the words 
under consideration, are undoubtedly supposed to be so by 
the gentleman alluded to, and his brethren in opinion ; I 
am pleased with having an opportunity of pointing out 
their mistake. Every one who is serving God in the work 
of the ministry, is directed by St. Paul, to " be gentle unto 
all men ; apt to teach, patient ; in meekness instructing 
those that oppose themselves ; if God peradventure will 



THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST, &C 328 

give them repentance to the acknow ledging of the truth." 
If this discourse should, by the blessing of God, serve to 
convince the gentleman who desired it, or any of similar 
sentiments, the advantage will be their own ; and the glo- 
ry will be wholly due to Him, who is mighty to save. 

But to enter on the subject, I would premise that it does 
not appear to have been the apostle's main design, when 
preaching to the Jews on the day of Pentecost, to discuss 
directly, all the views which he entertained of Christ's 
Person. They had put him to death as a criminal ; open- 
ly denying his having any commission from on high. It 
was their uniform plea, that he imposed on mankind, in as- 
serting that he was sent of God. They expected, indeed, the 
coming of the Messiah, predicted by their prophets; but 
they refused to acknowledge Jesus of Nazareth, as the one, 
sustaining that exalted character. This seems to have been 
the only point, which the inspired preacher was endeavor- 
ing to establish in their minds, at that time. It would 
have been useless to enter with them into the Messiah's 
Deity, while they rejected the claim of the crucified Jesus, 
altogether, to be the Messiah. With respect to the char- 
acter of the real Messiah, it is not probable, that they 
were prepared to dispute with him, who was then addres- 
sing them. His proper Deity appears to be well authen- 
ticated in their Scriptures ; and, no doubt, the Jews fully 
understood them, in that respect. 

They seemed to be in the dark, however, in regard to 
I the main design of the Messiah's mission; viz: that he 
was to suffer, die, rise from the grave, and ascend to hea- 
ven. To convince them, respecting these things, St. Pe~ 
Iter refers to a prophecy, delivered by David, the most il- 
llustrious king who ever sat on the throne of Israel ; and 
i who was one of the brightest types of their Messiah. The 
prophecy, in view, is contained in the 16th Psalm, and the 



T7- 



324 THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST 

10th verse. It runs thus—" Thou wilt not leave my soul 
in hell," or the grave ; " neither wilt thou suffer thine Ho- 
ly One to see corruption." In explication of this, the Apos- 
tle observes, " Men and brethren, let me freely speak un- 
to you of the Patriarch David, that he is both dead and 
buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. There- 
fore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn 
with an oath to him, that, of the fruit of his loins accor- 
ding to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his 
throne : he seeing this before, spake of the resurrection of 
Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh 
did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, 
whereof we are witnesses. Therefore, being by the right 
hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father 
the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this 
which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended 
into the heavens ; viz. in his body : but he saith himself, 
The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, 
until I make thy foes thy footstool." Our text follows ; 
" Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, < 
that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have cru- 
ci6ed, both Lord and Christ." This solemn declaration, | 
founded on such evidence as their own prophecies, with 
the remarkable effusion of the Spirit on the apostles, sound- 
ed in their ears like a peal of thunder, and led them to cry, 
" Men and brethren, what shall we do ?" 

But in the further discussion of the text, it is incumbent 
on me. to meet the supposed difficulty which it contains. 
It is undoubtedly this ; that whatever rank Christ holds 
in the universe, he was raised to it by the Father, who, in 
the passage under consideration, is called God. God hath 
made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both 
" Lord" and Christ. It will be said, that this conveys no 
other idea, than that of inferiority, subordination and de- 



CONSISTENT WITH HIS SUPREME DEITY. 325 

pendence. But that, we are ready to grant, with the ut- 
most cheerfulness ; having no fear of the result. 

In our text, and its connection, the Apostle is evidently 
speaking of the Son of God in his mediatorial capacity ; 
and in that respect, he certainly acts in subordination to 
the Father. In respect to his human nature, his depen- 
dence on God must be admitted. The text does not in- 
clude all that we believe concerning Jesus Christ ; but it is 
very far from standing in opposition to any of our views in 
respect to his person and character. But to set this in a 
clear light, it is necessary to make a concise statement of 
our views of this grand, but mysterious subject. 

Need I inform this enlightened assembly, that correct 
Trinitarians believe in the being of no more than one God, 
who is infinite in every perfection, and to whose glorious 
name all religious worship is due ? We consider the 
charge of being Tritheists, or believers in three Gods, as 
highly disingenuous, and inapplicable to our sentiments. 
It is acknowledged by an able and candid writer, in his 
" Plea for Unitarian Dissenters," that the name, " Unita- 
rian, is opposed to Trinitarian, or Tri-uni-tarian ; and 
signifies a believer in, and worshipper of one God in one 
person, as contradistinguished from a believer in and wor- 
shipper of one God in three persons." By these definitions, 
he completely exonerates us from the unjust accuse* ion of 
being Tritheists. We do believe, that in the Divine Es- 
sence, there are three distinct subsistences, which, for the 
want of a better expression, are called persons. The per- 
sonal distinction is viewed by us as being Consistent with 
the unity of the essence ; believing this mode of the Di- 
vine Existence to be the most perfect, happy, and glorious; 
laying a broad foundation for the most bright display of 
God's glory, in the eternal salvation of mankind. These 
distinct Divine Persons, we believe to sustain' different 



326 THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST 

offices in relation to the scheme of redemption, which am 
not on the same ground of equality with the original per- 
fections of their eternal and underived essence. As it is 
the office of the Father, or first person in the Trinity, to 
maintain the rights of the Deity or Godhead, it is, there- 
fore, primary and supreme. As the Son, or second person, 
has made the atonement by shedding his precious blood, 
and intercedes with the Father in behalf of his people ; 
and as the Holy Spirit, or third person, applies the re- 
demption of Christ to the souls of men ; their offices are, 
of course, inferior and subordinate to that of the Father. 
This is an accurate statement of the Trinitarian system ; 
and when it is fairly understood, it relieves many difficul- 
ties, in which our Anti- Trinitarian friends believe us to be 
involved. As the Son of God has taken human nature into a 
personal union with the divine ; performing, in that capacity, 
the momentous work of a Mediator ; he is, undoubtedly, 
in that respect, wholly dependent on God. From the ge- 
neral statement that has been made concerning the Per- 
sons in the adorable Trinity — the order of their distinct 
offices — the humanity as well as divinity of Christ— with 
his exercising a mediatorial government under the direc- 
tion of the Father ; it must be obvious to every dispas- 
sionate hearer, that the text under consideration is not in 
opposition to this important and Scriptural scheme. These 
facts in respect to Christ, do not militate in the least de- 
gree against his strict and proper Deity ; and they are to 
us consoling truths — truths, without which, we should 
have no right to expect eternal salvation. There is an 
important sense, therefore, in which he is subordinate to 
the Father ; and a sense, in which he hath made him both 
Lord and Christ. 

In farther investigating this sublime subject, it is pro- 
posed, through Divine assistance, to show? 



CONSISTENT WITH HIS SUPREME DEITY. 327 

I. What the Holy Scriptures teach us, in relation to the 
inferiority of the Son's office to that of the Father. Sub- 
ordination, in this respect, is a doctrine clearly set forth in 
the Oracles of Truth, in various and expressive phraseo- 
logy. As it is the office of the Father to defend the rights 
of the Deity, and to treat this fallen world as in a justly 
condemned state, he hath commissioned the second Per- 
son of the Trinity, to offer them salvation through faith 
in his atoning blood. On this account, he is called the 
servant of God — his messenger — his angel, and the Cap- 
tain of his host, with other appellations, indicating, with 
great clearness, inferiority of office. 

In respect to the Son being a servant to the Father in 
the glorious economy of redemption, see Isaiah 42. 1 : 
" Behold my servant, whom I uphold ; mine elect, in 
whom my soul delighteth. I have put my Spirit upon 
him ; he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles." In 
the 53d chapter, 11th verse, it is expressly said, "By his 
knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many ; for 
he shall bear their iniquities." But his acting in this ca- 
pacity, might easily be evinced from many other sacred 
passages, if the thing were necessary. That he is the 
Father's messenger, is a truth explicitly declared in Mai. 
3. 1 : " And the Lord whom ye seek, shall suddenly come 
to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant whom 
ye delight in. Behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of 
hosts." As angels are the ministers of Jehovah, his own 
eternal Son, in the plan of redeeming grace, is frequently 
called by that name ; but it is always accompanied with 
decided marks of supreme Divinity. In Isa. 63. 9, it is 
said of God, in relation to the children of Israel, " In all 
their afflictions, he was afflicted, and the angel of his pre- 
sence saved them." There is no other Spirit in the world 
above, railed the Ansel of God's presence. It is too hi^k 



328 THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST 

an appellation for a mere creature to sustain. But the 
uncreated glory of this Angel, appears with more clearness 
in Exodus 23. 20, 21. There, God s ith to Moses, " Be- 
hold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, 
and bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 
Beware of him, and obey his voice, and provoke him not ; 
for he will not pardon your transgressions ; for my name 
is in him." Such statements respecting his character and 
offices, are certainly pre-eminent marks of divine dignity. 
The Deity of this Angel appears with greater force of 
evidence, however, in Exodus, the 3d chapter. It is, with 
awful solemnity, stated there, "And the Angel of the 
Lord appeared unto Moses in a flame of fire, out of the 
midst of a bush ; and he looked, and behold, the bush 
burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. And 
• Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, 
why the bush is not burned. And when the Lord — that 
is, JEHOVAH, as it is in the original— saw that he turned 
aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the 
bush, and said, Moses, Moses : Draw not nigh hither; 
put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon 
thou standest is holy ground. Moreover he said, I am the 
God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, 
and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face ; for he 
was afraid to look upon God." When this same Angel 
appeared unto Abraham, he called him " the Lord, the 
Judge of all the earth ;" acknowledging himself to be but 
dust and ashes in his presence. For an understanding of 
this statement, permit me to refer you to the 18th chapter 
of Genesis. When this Almighty Angel addressed Joshua, 
the commander of the armies of Israel, he styled himself 
the Captain of the Lord's host ; and commanded this He- 
brew officer to worship him by the highest act of reverence 
which was then in use, viz. uncovering the feet. The 



CONSISTENT WITH HIS SUPREME DIVINITY. 329 

account at large is recorded in the 5th chapter of Joshua. 
But while the supreme Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ is 
announced in the Scriptures which have been quoted, they 
sufficiently show the subordination of his office to that of 
the Father. Our 'Lord Jesus Christ asserted repeatedly, 
that he was sent by the Father ; and that the Father, in 
that respect, was greater than himself. In testimony of 
this doctrine, citations from the Holy Scriptures might 
easily be multiplied. It is needless, however, to enlarge 
on this head ; for the thing in view is sufficiently clear. 
But in no other sense but that of office, is Christ, in his 
Divine nature, either inferior or subordinate to the Father. 
2. It is necessary now to show in what sense the Lord 
Jesus Christ is dependent on God. It must be allowed, 
that in respect to his body and soul, Christ is a real man, 
and as dependent on the Deity, as any other created being 
in the universe. It is in his human nature that he was 
crucified \ for the Divine nature could not die. Jesus our 
Lord, gloried in being the Son of man, as well as the 
Son of God. To exhibit a long list of passages in proof 
of this, is unnecessary to people who are in the habit of 
reading the Scriptures. As this is greatly labored by our 
Anti-Trinitarian opponents, we are fully prepared to meet 
them here, with our cordial assent. It would be a mourn- 
ful event to us, if the humanity of Christ could not be 
maintained. It is distinctly stated in the epistle to the He- 
brews, that " Forasmuch as the children are partakers of 
flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the 
same; that through death he might destroy him that had 
the power of death." No mere man, can, with any pro- 
priety, be said to take " flesh and blood ;" for that implies 
existence antecedent to the event. It appears with irresist- 
ible evidence, that each person in the Triune God, acted 

in giving: being to the human nature of Christ. It is well 

Ti 






330 THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST 

known that his conception is ascribed to the Holy Ghost; 
and to the Father, the Son is represented as saying, " A 
body hast thou prepared me ;" and we have seen that it is 
asserted by an apostle, that he himself " took flesh and 
blood." Thus the human nature of Christ, was evidently 
created by the Deity, who raised him from the dead, and 
will continue to support his existence through eternity. 
When the apostle informed the Jews, that " God had 
made that Jesus whom they had crucified, both Lord and 
Christ," he evidently meant him, who is called "the man 
Christ Jesus." In making him Lord, he laid the govern- 
ment of all things upon his shoulder. As man, his reign 
over all is manifestly derived from God. 3 n this capacity, 
he is the mediator, and exercises under God, a mediatorial 
government; but it is at present as extensive as the uni- 
verse. It is on this ground, the apostle felt himself war- 
ranted to say, "He is Lord of all." When he was about 
to ascend to heaven, he said to his disciples, " All power 
in heaven and on earth, is given unto me." Having 
" poured out his soul unto death, God hath highly exalted 
him, and given him a name which is above every name ; 
that at the name of Jesus, every knee should bow." We 
are ever ready to admit, that as a man, Christ is a depen- 
dent being, and that his government in lhat capacity, is 
as dependent on God, as the human part of his person. It 
is on this ground St. Paul said to the saints, " Ye are 
Christ's ; and Christ is God's." Having received his gov- 
vernment as a mediator from the Father, he certainly exer- 
cises it in a strict dependence on the power of God ; and 
when all its grand ends shall be accomplished, he is to re- 
sign it again into the Divine hand. This doctrine is clear- 
ly illustrated in the 15th chapter of St. Paul's epistle to 
the Corinthians. In speaking of God, he states there, 
that " He hath put all things under Christ's feet." This 



CONSISTENT WITH HIS SUPREME DEITY. 331 

inspired writer adds likewise, "But when he saith, All 
things are put under him, it is manifest thai he is excepted 
who did put all things under him. And when all things 
shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself 
be subject unto him who did rut all things under him, that 
God may be all in all." In this sublime sense, " the king-' 
doni" shall ultimately be delivered up to God; and Christ 
" shall put down ail rule, and all authority, and power," 
as a mediator between God and man. In the view of bis 
present government, Christ saith to his faithful servants, 
" He that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the 
end, to him will I give power over the nations : — even as 
I received of my Father." Nothing can be more plain, 
therefore, than that Christ in this sense is inferior and 
Subordinate to the Father; and as a man and a medi- 
ator, he is wholly dependent on God for his being and gov- 
ernment. As a man and a mediator, God hath set him at 
his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all 
principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and 
every name that is named, not only in this world, but also 
in that which is to come : and hath put all things under 
his feet, and gave him to be head over all the things to the 
Church, which is his body, the fulness of him who fllleth 
all in all." But such a glorious exaltation, would be ut- 
terly improper for him as a man, without being one person 
with " the Word, who was in the beginning with God, and 
was God." It is by his divine power, he is able to dis- 
charge the mighty offices, with which he is clothed as a 
man and a Redeemer. These things cannot be accounted 
for on any other principle. But for the further illustration 
of the subject, some general remarks will be made. And, 
1. From the view which has now been taken of it, we 
may infer, that the text under consideration furnishes no 
argument against the Trinitarian system. As the things 



332 THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST 

that have been mentioned, are all true in relation to the 
economy of redemption, and the complex Person of Jesus 
Christ, it must be expected that the Holy Scriptures will 
speak accordingly. In opposing any given scheme pf 
theology, it is highly necessary to understand it in all its 
principles, bearings, and relations. If this is not the case, 
many things will be urged as arguments, which are wholly 
inapplicable to the subject in debate. If Trinitarians be- 
lieved in an equality of offices, as well as perfections, in 
the different P rsons in the Godhead ; if they denied the 
humanity, mediatorial government, and dependence of 
Christ on God in all respects ; then we must acknowledge, 
the text which has been given to me as the theme of this 
discourse, would operate against them with irresistible ener- 
gy. We are fully apprised, that gentlemen of Anti- Trinita- 
rian sentiments plead, that the distinctions which have been 
made, are all mere art and evasion ; but we distinctly and 
solemnly deny the justness of the charge. If we had no 
such opposition to face, we should still go on in speaking 
of the complex Person of our glorious Redeemer, in the 
very same manner. It is as important for us to support 
these inferior views of his Person, as to vindicate his proper 
Deity. As he sustains our nature as well as God's, he 
must, like us, be subordinate and dependent. The dis- 
tinctions which have been made at this time, account very 
fully for all the acknowledgments of inferiority to the 
Father, which Jesus made when he was on the earth, and 
for all the prayers which he addressed to his throne. 

But how human nature can be united in one identical 
person with the Divine, we do not pretend to determine. 
It is a mystery, and must remain among the secret things 
of God, which belong to himself, and not to us. We be- 
lieve the doctrine, on the authority of Him who cannot 
lie ; readily admitting, that in this case, we have no desire 



CONSISTENT WITH HIS SUPREME DEITY. SSS 

to lean to our own understanding. Although we cannot 
see how the transcendently glorious Persons of the eternal 
and infinite Trinity are united in one simple and undivided 
essence, nor how the second Person is united to the " Man 
Christ Jesus ;" yet we evidently see the importance of 
these mysteries, in relation to the glory of God, and our 
eternal salvation ; and that is amply sufficient for all our 
purposes in the present life. 

2. From the view which has been taken of this subject, 
we may very consistently infer, that Anti- Trinitarians can- 
not give so clear an answer, to the serious difficulties 
which lie against their views of Christ's Person. Do the 
Scriptures say that Christ is subordinate to the Father, 
and dependent on God ? we freely admit these things ; 
and we are able notwithstanding, to show their entire con- 
sistency with Trinitarian doctrines. It is well known that 
the holy Scriptures declare his co-equality with the Father 
as explicitly, as his subordination and dependence. 

In the Epistle to the Phil. 2. 5, 6. the apostle saith to 
Christians, " Let this mind be in you, which was also in 
Christ Jesus; who, being in the form of God ; thought it 
not robbery to be equal with God." The opposers of the 
supreme Deity of Christ, cannot show the consistency of 
this text with their system ; and, therefore, there is no way 
left them, but to bear upon it with all the battering en- 
gines of fallacious criticism, that human art can devise. 
They are equally perplexed with many other passages. 
To convince yourselves of this, you have no more to do, 
than to cast your eyes on " the improved version of the 
New-Testament," as it is inconsistently called. In respect 
to the doctrine in question, its authors have scarcely left 
a resemblance between it and the English translation. 
But we are not under the necessity, of resorting to the arts 
of doubtful criticism, to evade the proofs adduced by our 



334 THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST 

opponents for the subordination and dependence of Christ ; 
for they are easily explained in perfect accordance with 
our theory. But alas! what can be done by them with 
the following passages, without much critical art, 
and disingenuous evasion ? " In the beginning w as the 
Word, and the Word ivas tvith God, and the Word was 
God" " All things were made by him." " And the Word 
was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his 
glory." John 1. 1,3, 14. " I and my Father are one." 
John 10. 30. " He that hath seen me, hath seen the Fa- 
ther." " Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the 
Father in me ?" John 14. 9, 10. " For by him were all 
things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, vis- 
ible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, 
or principalities, or powers ; all things were created by 
him, and for him; and he is before all things, and by him 
all things consist." Col. 1. 16, 17. "Whose are the 
fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh, Christ came, 
who is over all, God blessed forever." Rom. 9. 5. But 
unto the Son, he saith, " Thy throne, O God, is forever 
and ever." " And let all the angels of God worship him." 
Keb. 1. 6, 8. " That all men should honor the Son, even 
as they honor the Father." John 5. 23. "This is the 
true God, and eternal life." 1 John 5. 20. " And all the 
churches shall know, that I am he, that searcheth the 
reins and the heart." Rev. 2. 23. " These things saith 
the first and the last, who was dead and is alive." Rev. 
2. 8. There is a sense, therefore, in which Christ is equal 
with God, and a sense, in which he is unequal ; a sense 
in which he is independent, and a sense in which he is de- 
pendent and inferior. This double view of his glorious 
Person, makes every part of Scripture clear, in relation to 
our scheme ; but it leaves that of our opponents, in a cloud 
of darkness, so thick that it may be felt. On our plan, he 



CONSISTENT WITH HIS SUPREME DEITY. 335 

is God, and he is man : but on their's, he is a man only. 
To explain all " the Scriptures of truth," in consistency 
with his simple humanity, is really a Herculean task. It 
requires all the learning and researches of their most sub- 
tile doctors, and their combined exertions through all ages, 
to give even plausibility to the scheme ; and after all that 
they can do, the doctrine will be disbelieved by people, 
who are willing to look into the Bible with an impartial eye, 
and to set aside their own vain philosophy. It is now too 
late, to think of spreading very extensively such a deleteri- 
ous scheme, in opposition to the light that is prevailing in 
the world, in connection with the extensive operations of 
God's Spirit. This is an age of salvation. 

3. From the view which we have taken of this subject, 
we may infer, that every objection made to well establish- 
ed principles, must fall to the ground. It must be admit- 
ted, that plausible objections may be raised by studious 
and artful men, to every system of politics, ethics, philo- 
sophy, religion, or any other science that can be named. 
If we must disbelieve every thing that is called in question, 
nothing would be true. The supreme divinity of Christ, 
is better established by the Scriptures, than the first princi- 
ples of any of the sciences. It is founded on the testimo- 
ny of God ; and that is the highest possible evidence. 
To think of retaining the Scriptures, and rejecting this 
doctrine, is really chimerical. If this doctrine must be 
given up,, as a thing incompatible with reason, let the book 
which evidently contains it, fall with it. Consistency re- 
quires the -sacrifice The doctrine, however, is not contra- 
ry to reason ; but it is infinitely above it ; and, therefore, 
it is an object of faith, and not of sense. But human pride 
is unwilling, in this case, to submit to divine revelation 
The principle is first assumed, that Christ cannot be God ; 
and then the Scriptures must be put on the rack, to make 



336 THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST, &C. 

them acknowledge it. But to entertain incorrect concep- 
tions of Christ's Person, is really a dangerous error. If he 
is the supreme God, to undeify him, is a bold undertaking ; 
and if he is nothing but a man, we are gross idolators. 
" What think ye of Christ ?" is a question of the first mag- 
nitude. May the Lord prepare us all to give it a proper 
answer. Amen. 



THE END. 



SUBSCRIBERS' NAMES. 



TRENTON. 



Thomas M'Elroy 

Samuel Stevenson 

Miss Eunice Gouge 

Jacob Gouge 

'Stephen D. Wiser 

Jeremiah Wiser 

Miss Mary Ward 

Miss Patty Miller 

Miss Mary H. Stevens 

David S. Chapin 

Miss Rebekah White 

George W. Gurney 

Nathan Gurney, Esq. 

John A. Gurney 

James K. M'Elroy 

Miss Anna M' Arthur 

Daniel R. Howe 

Ezra Birdseye 

David H. Spencer 

Miss Sally Perkins 

James Birdsell 

William Dodd 

Mark A. Hopkins 

Nathan T. Colwell 

Elisha Wells 

Pascal C. I. De Angelis, Esq. 

Miss Harriet Ward 

Isaac I. Wiser 

Elias Curry 

Isaac Curry 

Cornelius H. Schermerhorn 

Col. Thomas Hicks 

Dea. Lemuel Barrows 

Capt. John Hicks 

Hezekiah House 

Daniel Treadwell 

Horace Woodbridge 

Edwin Woodbridge 

Joseph Steele 

Maj. Jams Dodd 

Daniel Hubbard 

Isaac D. Dodd 

Oersham Wolcott 

Uu 



John Storrs, Esq. 
William Piatt 
Alexander Fraser 
Charles Gouge 
Ephraim Hoyt 
Mr. Dickinson 
Miss Mary Prince 
Harris Hopkins 
Sylvester Wolcott 
Dr. John A. Miller 
John Younglove 
George Boyd 
Thomas Sly 
Widow Hannah Egert 
Peter Garrett 
David Storrs 
David Chapin 
Samuel Wells 
Isaac Cande 
ira Mix 

Chester R. Wells 
Robert Wells 
Daniel Clark 
I. Otis Hulbert 
Christopher Wells, Jun, 
Capt. David Hamlin 
Richard Johnson 
Joseph Hamlin 
William G. Lloyd 
7oseph C, Hulbert 
Abner Seymour 
Jason Coye 
John Harbuttle 
Justus Thayre 
George Perkins 
John Howe 
Reuben Hail 
William Colwell 
Hiram Miller 
Samuel White 
Selah Blin 
Mrs, Mary Fraser 



SUBSCRIBERS' NAMES. 



DEERFIELD. 



Daniel Blue 
Malcolm Blue 
Nathan Pat/nin 
Dta. Calvin Preston 
Aaron Reed 
Daniel Cameron 
Earl S. K ng 
Miss Hannah Goodrich 
David Carlisle 
Calvin Preston, Jun. 
Alexauder Blue 
Mi.ss Isabel Blue 
Alexander Walker 
Dea. Warner Forbes 
Joei Fox 
Allen Blue 
Abraham Goodrich 
Dmiel M'Kay 
Wm, Crookshanks, Jun. 
Peter Forbes 



Joseph Howe, Esq, 
Capt Lewis Reed 
Jacob F rbttsh 
John M Ivee 
Dea. Duncan Blue 
Martm Wiser 
Neil Beaton 
Caleb Fowler 
John Haggert 
James Crookshanks 
Elias Wiser 
Daniel M'lntyre 
Archibald Blue 
Frederick A. Staring 
Ezekiai Biker 
Ezekiel B -Nash 
Ed ward Sal isbu ry 
Ryer Schenuerhorn 
Edward Salisbury, Jun. 
Elisha Robbing 



UTICA. 



Charles Hastings 

Talcott Camp 

Hezekiah Hulbert, 4 copies 

James H. Johnston 

A. Merrell 

Lewis Merrell 

Edward Vernon 

Ira Merrell 

William Tillman 

Bildad Merrell 



Rev. Samuel C. Aikin 

Dea. N. Butler 

Rev John Farnan, 2 copies 

H. Chapin 

John Colweil 

Hugh M tchell 

N. N. Weaver 

Cornelius Davis 

Wm. B. Gray 



BOONVILLE. 



William Sippell 
Miss Erretta Wheeler 
Peter Sippell, Jun. 
Asaph Mitchell 
Mrs.Arubah H. Deming 
Ebenezer Wheeler, Jun. 
Leonard Kingsbury, Jun. 
Elisha Grant," Jun. 
Ebenezer Harrington 
Mrs. Esther Southwell 



Elisha Wheeler 
Daniel Benedict 
John Churchill 
Dr. Nathan North 
Horace Morse 
Miss Eliza Blackmail 
John Taylor 
Josiah Hurlburt 
Daniel Sippell 



subscribers' names. 



REMSEN. 

Henry Thompson 
Miss Margaret Stebbins 
A. Leach 
H. Ferry 
Lemuel Hough 
Zalmon Root, Esq. 
Oliver Smith 
Mr. Morgan 
M<\ Stebbins 
Broughton White 

PARIS. 

Patrick Campbell 
Gen. Henry M'Niel 
Charles Simmons 
Ezra C. Southworth 
Timothy Hopkins 
Rev. Publius V. Bogue 
Col. Gardiner Avery 
Wai. Emmons 
Adam Simmons 
Theophilus Steele 
Abel Simmons 
John Stacy 

RUSSIA. 
Dea. Isaiah Johnson 
Dea. John M« Andrew 
Roland Sears, M. D. 
Philip Preston 
Maj. Abiathar Joy 
Nathan Millington, Esq. 
Capt. Aaron Root 
Hiram Right 
Daniel Williams 
Jonathan Millington 
Daniel Swezy 
George Swezy 
Nehemiah Sperry 
Sameel Buck 
Samuel Griswold 
Dea. Daniel Swezy 

NORWAY. 

Rev. Samuel Swezey 
ZtMias Brownson 
James Norton 
Daniel P. Henderson, Esq. 



Ephes'is Babbit 
Silvanus Feme, Esq. 
Dea. Amos Brownson 
Dea. Seth Smith 
Dr. Bryant Bui well 
Capt. Dudley Smith 
Col. Jared Thayer 
Asa Brownson 
George A. Coppernoll 
Wheeler C;ise. 
Benjamin Preston 
Joseph Davis 
George Barstow 

NEWPORT. 

Sherman Wooster, Esq. 
Capt. H^zekiah Wilbur 
Mala c.i Mason 
John Swezey 

Hezekiah B. Rounds, Esq. 
Rev. Jason Lathrop 

VIENNA. 

Chauncey Bird 
Roswell Thayre 
Alexander Horn 
Dea. Oramon Tuttle 
Joshua Simonds 
Abraham Wood 
John Waid 
Wm. W. Johnson 
Samuel Rowley 
Winslow Dunton 
Ira Ransom 
Jonathan Lowe 
Timothy Halsted 
David Dutton 
Amon Root 
John Lowe 
Dea. Sullivan Brighaiu 
Christian Hand 
Moses Burt 
Calvin Hooper 
Otis Wheelock 
Stutely Wescott 
Gershom Hold ridge 
Miss Prudence Wait! 
Dea. Oliver Bill 
George Haskins 






subscribers' nam£s. 



CAMDEN. 
Dea. Billious Pond 
Dea. Ashbel Up a on 
Mr Bryan 
Avery Ballard 
Daniel Stary 

REDFIELD. 

Alen Seymour 
Joseph Burket 
David D ckerson, M. D. 
Col. Amos Johnson 
Dea. Amos Kent 
Lucy Alden 
Eli Stromg 

CONSTANTIA. 
John L, Bernhard 

PAINTED POST. 

Capt. B. Harrowar, 6 copies 

Mrs. Ann M'Call - 

Mrs. Mary Sharp 

Miss Mariah M'Call 

John Owens Parker. 

Dock R. H. Hoyk 

Wm, Bonham, Jr. 

John Knox, Esq. 

Frances Erwia,2 copies 

Nehemiah Hubbell 

George Sly 

Thos. M 5 Burn ey, Esq. 2 copies 

Joseph Giliet, Esq. 

Joel Coe 

Abner Thurber- 

John P Ryerss 

Adin Palmer 

Robert Patterson 

Capt. Timothy Goodrich 

George Youngs 

BATH. 

Adg. Samuel Neally 
Finla M'Chire 
Wm. J. Neally 
Zephaniah S. Campbell 
Dugald Cameron, & copies 
Robert Campbell 
Erastus Shepard 
Horace Howell 



Rev David Higgins 

Wm. W. M'Cay 
John Magee 
Henry Wells, Esq. 
Elias Hopkins, Esq 

DURHAM. 

Josiah Gilbert, Esq 

Rev Seth Williston, 2 copies 

WILLIAMSTOWN. 

Abner Comstock 
Nathaniel Goodwin 
Sheiden Spencer 
Mrs. Elizabeth S. Lyon 
Jacob Berringe 
Jacob Miller 
Samuel Plumb, Jr. 
Samuel Plumb 
Mrs. Sarah Comstock 

GUILFORD. 

Daniel Smith 
Daniel T. Dickenson 
Abner Gilbert, Esq, 
Wm Gibbs, Jr. 
Daniel Savage 
Calvin Mills 
Dea. Lemuel Mills 
James Morgan, Esq. 
Eddy Phetteplace 
Ira Bradley 
Daniel Johnson, Esq. 
Capt Hiram Johnson 
Joshua Mersereau, Esq. 
Gustavus A. Rogers 
Julius Whiting 
Rev. Asa Donaldson 
A. Johnson 
Ambrose Norton 
Asa Whetemore 
John B. Saston, Esq. 
Stephen May 
Rev. Charles Lahatt 

SIDNEY. 

Ezra Clark 
Charles S, Rogers 
Levi Baxter, Esq. 
Avery Farnham 



subscribers' names. 



Hugh Dudgeon 

Eliasaph Farnham 

Wm A. Fry 

Sturges L. Bradley 

John Fry 

Nathan Smith 

Maj. Azor Smith 

Marcus Harrison, Candidate 
FLORENCE. 

Dea Benoni Barlow 

Asa Barns 
Henry Barns 
Amos Woodworth 

LEXINGTON. 
Ransom Johnson 
Maj William Parker 
William Diston 
John W. Thompson 
Dea. Theophilus Peck 
Dea. Ebenezer Johnson 
Capt. Justus Squire 
Luman Squire 
Charles Vorse 
Justus Coe 
Samuel Peck 
Ezra Pratt 



Atanson Hocum 
Joel Peck 
David Johnson 
David Rice 
Benajah Rice 
Daniel Mitchell 
William Burn 
Asahel Dickerman 
Munson Buel, Esq, 
Isaac D. Johnson 
Oliver Coe, Esq. 
Miss Nancy Hull 
James Osborn 
John Peck 
John Parker 
Samuel Baldwin 
Amos Peck 
Norman Ticknor 
Ira Johnson 
Ziba Johnson 
Henry Johnson 
Ransom Wolcott 
Samuel Wolcott 
Ira Hice 
Eliada Parker 
Reuben I. Wolcott 



VARIOUS PLACES. 

The Rev. David Porter, D. D. Catskill, N. Y. 2 copies, 

The Rev Joel T. Benedict, Chatham, N. Y. 

The Rev. William Bull. Chatham, N. Y. 7 copies, 

The Rev. Silas Churchill, New Lebanon, Mass. 

Rev. Samuel Sheperd, D- D. Lenox, Mass, 

Rev. Isaac Knapp, Westiield, Do. 

Rev. Enoch Hale, Westhampton, Do, 

Rev. Elijah Gridley, Granby, Do. 

Rev. Mr. Cooley, Granville, Dq. 

Rev. Mr. Ely, Munson, Do. 

Rev. Joel Wright, Goshen, Do. 

Rev. Thomas Shepherd, Ashfield, Do. 

Rev. Gordon Dorrence, Windsor, Do. 

Mr. George W. Benedict, Williamstown College, Do. 2 copies 

Mr. Ebenezer Kellogg, Williams College, Do. 

Mr. Alvan Wheeler, Williams College, Do, 

Rev. Ralph W. Gridley, Williamstown, Do. 

Rev. Daniel Collins, Lanesborough, Do. 

Rev. Noah Sheldon, Lanesborough, Do. 

Rev. Alvan Somers, Spencertown, Do. 

Rev. Guedree Hayden, Egremont, Do. 

William Ballantine, Esq. Washington, Do* 

Mr. Strong, Southampton, Do. 



subscribers' names, 



Rev. Eleazer Williams, Oneida. 

Levinus D. Nichols, Nocway. 

George Hopkins, Floyd. 

John C. Hopkins, Do 

Grove G. Hopkins, Do. 

Rev. Evan Roberts, Steuben. 

Rev. Seth Burt, Litchfield. 

James Hadley, M. D. Fairfield. 

Alden Gage, Do. 

Kev. Ruel Kembal, Ley den. 

Dea- Ose Brownson. Norway. 

Mrs Esther Root, Meriden, Con. 

Dea. Julius Billings, Ley den. 

Maj. Peter Ward, Do " 

Rev. Daiiiel Nash LowviHc. 

Dea. David Dickey, Edmonstnn 

Capt David M Master, Unadilla. 

Candidate Egbert Roosa, Kingston- 

William Duval, Bainbridge. 

Dea Israel Smith. Do. 

Elial Ford, Guilford. 

Dr Lemuel Hudson, Vfewtown. 

Dea John Shepherd, AthenSj Bradford 
county, Penn. 

Or. William Jones, Owego. 

Ei-astus Waters, Franklin 

Rev. Asahel Bronson, Yorktown, West- 
chester county, N. Y. 

Samuel Henson, Hunter. 

Miss Belinda Beers Franklin. 

Col. Reuben Leoi ard, Brookfield. 

Pliny Mainnard, Do. 

Edmund Newton, Do. 

Matthew Hoyt, Cherry Valley. 

Rev Jon. F.Schermerhorn, Middle burg. 

Rev. Winslow Page, Broome. 

"William Emmons, Cairo. 

Dea. Lemuel Hitchcock, Durham. 

Alfred Craft, Cherry Valley, 

Philander Smith, Harpersfield. 

David Penfield, Do. 

Chauncey Hoffman, Bainbridge. 

Capt. Uriah Hanford, Unadilla. 

David H. Gurney, Westmoreland. 

Rev. Henry Smith, Camden- 

Rev. James Ells, Westmoreland. 

Rev. Israel Brainerd, Verona 

Rev E nos Bliss, Lorrain. 

Capt. William Williams. Steuben. 

Daniel Gazley, Edmonston. 

Rev. Joel Chapin, Bainbridge. 

Aaron Owens. Do. 

Rev. Charles Thorp, Coventry.- 



Nicholas Sliter, Unadilla, 

Rev.Elisha Wise. Deposit. 

Samuel Cotton, Butternuts. 

Rev. Elisha Tucker, Coventr)£ $ " 

Henry Redfield, Bainbridge. " * 

Israel Day, Green. 

Dea. Amos Curtis. Ex ter 

Rev. Joshua Knight, Sherburn. 

Rev. Ihomas W. Dun ean, Exeter. 

Benjamin Storrs, Columbus. 

William Ho>t, Juii Green. 

Rev. John B. Hoyt, Do 

Mr. Comes Do. 

William Prossor, Athens, Penn. 

Rev. Horatio L. Lombard, Owego. 

Wm B. Swain, Athens, Penn. 

Samuel Warner, Do. Do 

Rev James R Hotchkin, Prattsburgh. 

Elam Bridges, Do. 

Rev. Henry Ford, Newtown, or Elmira. 

John H Barrow Do. Do. 

Solomon Campbell, Esq Campbelltown, 

Steuben county. 
Curtis Parkhurst, M. D. Lawrenceville, 

Pennsylvania. 
Mortimer Strong, Athens, Penn. 
Hudson I. Griswold, Do. Do. 
Moses Lernard, Do i)o. 
John Elwell, Do. Do. 
Heman Parsons, Do. Do. 
Cornelius \iersereau, Union. 
Rev. Benjamin Ndes, Chenango Points 
Capt. William Van Name, Do. 
Col. William Edwards, Hunter, 2 copies. 
George A Crooker, Cairo. 
Rev. Daniel Beers, L'o. 
Gurdon Huntington, M. D. Do. 
Simon Say re, Do. 
Holly Se.-iy, Unadilla. 
Dea. John Ambler, New-Berlin. 
Zen as S. Jackson, Rome. 
Josiah Dickenson, Do 
Bennet Pratt, Dalton, Mass. 
Wait H. Baldwin, Windham. 
Daniel Van Dyke, r"airo. 
Ira Baldwin, Hudson. 
Samuel Atwater, Windham. 
Theron Hough, Do. 
Israel Thompson Lenox. 
Noble B. Beckett Sherman, Con* 
Philip Preston, Brownville 
Rev. David Rathbun, Tioga co. Penn. 
E Lindsey, Esq. Liinlsley Town, N. Y. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. I 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: July 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



L.V 



BB^ V 



Of CO 1 



HG.^ sS 




01A 



475 



939 



ipS'SiiBlli^RIl 

*>>i* Ffimli fMfi UttiiHli /'Iff wl iv'i ^ (*'fii i^ijh'JI , i^^ ,j iIlfif \ 



